Sujet : Re: What is wrong with malloc?
De : Keith.S.Thompson+u (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Keith Thompson)
Groupes : comp.lang.cDate : 08. Jan 2025, 21:20:05
Autres entêtes
Organisation : None to speak of
Message-ID : <8734htrrbe.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Phillip <
nntp@fulltermprivacy.com> writes:
[...]
C89 and C90 are better for 8-bit systems then C99 and newer. Not that
you can't do 8-bit on C99 but it's just not designed as well for it
since C99 assumes you've moved on to at least 16-bit.
There were no changes in the sizes of the integer types from C89/C90 to
C99, aside from the addition of long long. (And an implementation with
8-bit int would be non-conforming under any edition of the standard,
though it might be useful.)
Perhaps some C89/C90 implementations are better for 8-bit systems than
some C90 implementations?
-- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.comvoid Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */