Re: Why are gsize and gssize typedefs reversed

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

Jeff Franks <jcf tpg com au> writes:

>   Hi,
> 
> In types.sgml the typedefs for gsize and gssize are defined as
> 
> <!-- ##### TYPEDEF gsize ##### -->
> <para>
> An unsigned 32-bit integer intended to represent sizes of data structures.
> </para>
> 
> 
> <!-- ##### TYPEDEF gssize ##### -->
> <para>
> A signed 32-bit integer intended to represent sizes of data structures.
> </para>
> 
> This seems a bit confusing because it is the reverse for all other
> glib data types. For the sake of consistency shouldn't 'gsize' be a
> signed 32-bit integer and 'gusize' be an unsigned 32-bit integer.
> 
> Just wondering,

Consistency with the standard names size_t and ssize_t. (You
might very well ask why, if we wanted to be consistent, we didnt'
simply _use_ the standard names.)

Regards,
                                        Owen