On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 05:54:21PM -0000, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> I stopped reading the patch after I saw that. I don't like long where an "int" will
> suffice, or where an int and a long are the same thing. long really should never be used.
> Because if you need a certain bitness, then there are datatypes which ensure that.
Markup on calendar :D I fully agree with Dick :P
> int64_t comes to mind.
I confirm that int64_t and uint64_t fully fit the bill. I'm using them
for the extended layer supports. Doing bi-architecture printf and scanf
is another thing, sadly...
On Thu, Feb 06, 2014 at 05:54:21PM -0000, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> I stopped reading the patch after I saw that. I don't like long where an "int" will
> suffice, or where an int and a long are the same thing. long really should never be used.
> Because if you need a certain bitness, then there are datatypes which ensure that.
Markup on calendar :D I fully agree with Dick :P
> int64_t comes to mind.
I confirm that int64_t and uint64_t fully fit the bill. I'm using them
for the extended layer supports. Doing bi-architecture printf and scanf
is another thing, sadly...
--
Lorenzo Marcantonio
Logos Srl