Re: [PATCH v3] Many pages: Document fixed-width types with ISO C naming

[Alejandro Colomar]

Hi Xi,

On 8/25/22 09:28, Xi Ruoyao wrote:
> On Thu, 2022-08-25 at 09:20 +0200, Alejandro Colomar via Gcc-patches
> wrote:
> > I don't know for sure, and I never pretended to say otherwise.  But what
> > IMHO the kernel could do is to make the types compatible, by typedefing
> > to the same fundamental types (i.e., long or long long) that user-space
> > types do.
>
> In user-space things are already inconsistent as we have multiple libc
> implementations.  Telling every libc implementation to sync their
> typedef w/o a WG14 decision will only cause "aggressive discussion" (far
> more aggressive than this thread, I'd say).
>
> If int64_t etc. were defined as builtin types since epoch, things would
> be a lot easier.  But we can't change history.

This would be great.  I mean, the fundamental types should be u8, u16, 
... and int, long, ... typedefs for these, and not the other way around, 
if the language was designed today.

Maybe GCC could consider something like that.

Cheers,

Alex

--
Alejandro Colomar
<http://www.alejandro-colomar.es/>

Attachment: OpenPGP_signature
Description: OpenPGP digital signature