On Tuesday 16 August 2005 20:49, Ullrich von Bassewitz wrote: > On Tue, Aug 16, 2005 at 06:09:20PM +0200, Groepaz wrote: > > ok, another great excuse for me to not use them :=) > > Well, the types aren't as useless as they seem to be. Note the last > sentence: > > "However, if an implementation provides integer types with widths of 8, > 16, 32, or 64 bits, it shall define the corresponding typedef names." > > So, *if* the implementation has an unsigned integer type with 8 bits, it > must supply an uint8_t type. If you're using this uint8_t type and your > software doesn't compile, this means that there is no such type and your > program won't run anyway. Which in turn means that one should only use > uint8_t if it's an absolute requirement to have a datatype with exactly 8 > bits. Otherwise it's better to use uint_least8_t, which has at least 8 bits > and is a required type. mmmh ok, not so great excuse then :) i still prefer my u8/u16/u32 types, i'm lazy with typing :=) -- http://www.hitmen-console.org http://www.gc-linux.org/docs/yagcd.html http://www.pokefinder.org http://ftp.pokefinder.org Eine wirklich gute Idee erkennt man daran, dass ihre Verwirklichung von vorne herein ausgeschlossen erscheint. <Albert Einstein> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list send mail to majordomo@musoftware.de with the string "unsubscribe cc65" in the body(!) of the mail.Received on Tue Aug 16 23:47:44 2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 2005-08-16 23:47:47 CEST