List Info

Thread: the rationale for defining macros for simple types?




the rationale for defining macros for simple types?
user name
2006-08-10 15:45:58
On Thu, 10 Aug 2006, Smith, Jason - VA wrote:

> Robert,
>
> stdint.h is a part of glibc methinks, and not part of
any blessed
> standard that I am aware of.

my copy of harbison and steele lists <stdint.h> as
part of C99.  am i
somehow reading that incorrectly?

> What you probably want to include for the int*_t types
is
> <inttypes.h>, which found in
/usr/(local/)?/include on most of the
> common *nix's out there (might be part of a standard
like C99 too).

again, from my copy of H&S, inttypes.h includes
stdint.h, so i guess
either one would work fine.  i'm guessing inttypes.h would
be the
better choice since it's more all-encompassing.  thanks.

rday
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line
"unsubscribe linux-c-programming" in
the body of a message to majordomovger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vge
r.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[1]

about | contact  Other archives ( Real Estate discussion Medical topics )