Re: CFT: uintmax_t rman

From: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel_at_gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2015 10:09:06 +0200
On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 07:25:54PM -0500, Benjamin Kaduk wrote:
> Channeling my inner bde (maybe?), the typedef is probably helpful, but
> uintmax_t seems less so.  uintmax_t has no guaranteed ABI, so a
> fixed-width type like uint64_t seems beter, assuming that uintmax_t is
> currently uint64_t everywhere (which I think is the case but did not
> verify).

The statement about {u}intmax_t not having a guaranteed ABI is wrong,
I believe.  You cannot change the type after it is exposed.

I am sure that ANSI C or POSIX would introduce intthistimerealmax_t after
long long long type is added (only half-joking).
Received on Tue Nov 17 2015 - 07:09:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:41:01 UTC