Re: oops? read/write vs type of length parameter

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <address@hidden>
> Cc: Jim Meyering <address@hidden>,
>     address@hidden
> Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:40:54 +0900
> 
>  > We call these functions with an argument of type EMACS_INT,
> 
> If you're going to do that, why not declare it as an EMACS_INT?

I actually considered that.  The reasons I eventually decided against
it are all minor: I hate to type-cast if I can avoid that, and I try
to avoid passing to library functions data types that are different
from what the header declares.  The fact that it used to be `int' was
also a minor factor.  Finally, sysdep.c doesn't use EMACS_INT, except
in one very special case, so it looked like using standard types was
its "style".

But these are all minor, so if people prefer EMACS_INT, I don't mind.

> The problem with using external standard types is that some developers
> will proceed to "correct" them

"Correct" them to what and why?