Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

How do you feel about setting maxBytes to uint64 rather than int? #63

Closed
asoorm opened this issue Nov 25, 2017 · 1 comment
Closed

How do you feel about setting maxBytes to uint64 rather than int? #63

asoorm opened this issue Nov 25, 2017 · 1 comment

Comments

@asoorm
Copy link

asoorm commented Nov 25, 2017

https://github.com/globalsign/mgo/blob/master/session.go#L2925

This way if we want capped collections, we don't have the restriction of deployment of this driver to a 64bit machine

@domodwyer
Copy link

Hi @asoorm

Using an int where the correct type should be a uint is something that annoys me more than it should! However in the interests of backwards compatibility I'm of the opinion we should leave it as is.

Lets be clear - I completely agree with you, it's an obvious mistake in the original implementation, but changing it would mean users can't use our fork as a drop-in replacement for mgo. If we ever break this compatibility, I'll be changing this to a uint64 for sure.

Dom

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants