Re: What integer C type to use (was: Cray style vectors)

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
>

anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:
>

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>

anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) writes:
>

scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
>

The Unix code ported relatively easily to I32LP64 because
uintptr_t had been used extensively rather than assumptions
about
sizeof(int) == sizeof(int *).

>
...
>

Sorry, I meant ptrdiff_t, which was used for pointer math.

>
I have seen little code that uses ptrdiff_t;  quite a bit that
used size_t (the unsigned brother of ptrdiff_t).  But my memory
tells me that even size_t was not very widespread in 1995.

>
In 1995 a problem with both size_t and ptrdiff_t is that there

>
Calling it a "problem" is overstating the case.  It was
straightforward enough, if not completely portable to
use the appropriate number of 'l' modifiers.

Whether it is called a problem or not, the lack of support from
printf() was mentioned upthread (by OP?), and that's why I pointed it
out.  The point is that not having the appropriate length modifiers
in C90 makes the code clumsy and the coding inconvenient.  Focusing
on what word is used is a red herring.