Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<20250413221457.000029b3@yahoo.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: do { quit; } else { }
Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 22:14:57 +0300
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <20250413221457.000029b3@yahoo.com>
References: <vspbjh$8dvd$1@dont-email.me>
	<86ecy5fjin.fsf@linuxsc.com>
	<20250406190321.000001dc@yahoo.com>
	<86plhodtsw.fsf@linuxsc.com>
	<20250407210248.00006457@yahoo.com>
	<vt15lq$bjs0$3@dont-email.me>
	<vt2lp6$1qtjd$1@dont-email.me>
	<vt31m5$2513i$1@dont-email.me>
	<vt3d4g$2djqe$1@dont-email.me>
	<vt3iqh$2ka99$1@dont-email.me>
	<vt5fed$ccri$1@dont-email.me>
	<vt5js2$g1t7$1@dont-email.me>
	<20250409142303.00004645@yahoo.com>
	<87ikndqabc.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
	<20250410115501.000037a5@yahoo.com>
	<vt8ei8$2vn84$1@dont-email.me>
	<20250410080629.532@kylheku.com>
	<vt94q5$3jjod$1@dont-email.me>
	<vt9628$3hhr8$3@dont-email.me>
	<vtammh$174ev$1@dont-email.me>
	<vtavn9$1dp7m$3@dont-email.me>
	<87r01ysgxb.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
	<20250413205703.000059ce@yahoo.com>
	<vth16f$3g7ar$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 13 Apr 2025 21:15:02 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="9863df71b68e2ba3072c62004daf6125";
	logging-data="3566608"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18N93WAntz3GpLpGBCxIN0md7fg+sCcMyk="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:AarSNppyos1Z9HdlOAy/3QYs9Cg=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 4.1.1 (GTK 3.24.34; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
Bytes: 3529

On Sun, 13 Apr 2025 20:53:03 +0200
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:

> On 13/04/2025 19:57, Michael S wrote:
> > On Fri, 11 Apr 2025 11:15:44 -0700
> > Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:
> >   
> >> bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> >> [...]  
> >>> 8 A u64 type can be denoted as either 'uint64_t' OR as some
> >>> combination of the tokens (long, long, unsigned, [int])  
> >>
> >> "uint64_t" and "unsigned long long int" do not mean the same thing.
> >>  
> > 
> > And it's a PITA.
> >   
> 
> There is only one thing I find a little bit annoying about the sized 
> integer types in C - the printf specifiers.


Yes, in practice it is the main reason why I find absence of
system-independent correspondence between [u]intn_t types and basic
integer types a PITA. But there exist few other cases where it causes
problems, e.g. using Intel intrinsic like _addcarry_u64() in code that
have to be compiled on different 64-bit OSes.

As to why you feel stronger than you about it, I'd guess it's because I
write code that has to be compiled, preferably without warnings, on
different platforms more often than you do. Most of 32-bit and 64-bit
platforms are compatible to each other, but 64-bit Unix/Linus is at
odds with the rest of them.

>  I tend to "cheat" with 
> these, using "%lu" for uint32_t on the targets I usually use, where I 
> know uint32_t is "long unsigned int".  Other than that, I stick to
> the size-specific types for much of my code except local "throw-away" 
> variables that might be "int".  Compatibility or lack thereof between 
> the size-specific types and the standard integer types is simply 
> irrelevant in my code.
>