Pour obtenir une clé
d'essai remplissez le formulaire ci-dessous
Demandez des tariffs
Nouvelle licence
Renouvellement de licence
--Sélectionnez la devise--
* En cliquant sur ce bouton, vous acceptez notre politique de confidentialité

Free PVS-Studio license for Microsoft MVP specialists
To get the licence for your open-source project, please fill out this form
** En cliquant sur ce bouton, vous acceptez notre politique de confidentialité.

I am interested to try it on the platforms:
** En cliquant sur ce bouton, vous acceptez notre politique de confidentialité.

Message submitted.

Your message has been sent. We will email you at

If you haven't received our response, please do the following:
check your Spam/Junk folder and click the "Not Spam" button for our message.
This way, you won't miss messages from our team in the future.

Is there a way to make the type size_t …

Is there a way to make the type size_t 32-bit in a 64-bit program?

23 Jan 2012

While porting code from a 32-bit system to a 64-bit one, you may want to make the types size_t/ptrdiff_t 32-bit again to reduce the number of errors and warnings generated by the compiler. This wish is usually justified by the supposition that the program will not have to deal with much memory and many objects.

Here is an instance of such a dispute on the forum: "Can use 32 bit size_t in x64 VC2008 STL?".

This is a brief answer to begin with: you must not and should not think that way. Concentrate on correcting errors and warnings. There are a lot of reasons for this answer. Here are some of them.

Suppose you managed to redefine the type size_t as a 32-bit one in your code by resorting to some tricks (typedef, #define). Then:

1) The code will become incompatible with libraries built with the size_t of the standard size.

2) You will get more errors. For example:

#define size_t unsigned
void Errors(void *ptr, CArray<int> &arr)
  size_t a = (size_t)ptr;
  ptr = (void *)a; //Invalid pointer
  //Infinity loop if array size > UINT_MAX
  for (size_t i = 0; i != arr.GetSize(); i++)
    arr[i] = 0;

3) Many operations will lead to warnings and become potentially incorrect. For example:

#define size_t unsigned
void A(float *p1, float *p2)
  size_t s = p1 - p2; //Warning C4244

Let us summarize. You should not try to "hack" the types size_t/ptrdiff_t and change their sizes. You might need more person-hours to solve the problem of linking your code with libraries and correcting new errors and compiler-generated warnings than to perform refactoring of the code to provide it with the full 64-bit support. Resorting to such a "hacking" you are risking to bring a lot of hidden defects into the code that will be difficult to detect for a long time. For example, a code where a pointer is stored in a 32-bit integer variable may work quite well for a long time while the pointer refers to an object lying inside the four low-order Gbytes of memory. But the object may be created outside these four low-order Gbytes at any point. And this is most likely to happen while you are actively exploiting the program rather than testing it.

Please, read the articles in the references section to learn more on the topic.


Comments (0)

Next comments
Unicorn with delicious cookie
Nous utilisons des cookies pour améliorer votre expérience de navigation. En savoir plus