Re: "A diagram of C23 basic types"

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

Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> writes:
 
[some symbols are defined in more than one header]
 

(In my opinion, things would be better if headers were not allowed
to behave as if they include other headers, or provide identifiers
also given in other heards.  Not in ISO C, and not in POSIX.
Every identifier should be declared in exactly one home header,
and no other header should provide that definition.  [...])

 
Not always practical.  A good example is the type size_t.  If a
function takes an argument of type size_t, then the symbol size_t
should be defined, no matter which header the function is being
declared in.

Why?  One can use a type without a name for such type.

Similarly for NULL for any function that has defined
behavior on some cases of arguments that include NULL.

Why?  There are many ways to produce null pointers.  And fact that
a function had defined behavior for null pointers does not mean
that users will need null pointers.

No doubt
there are other compelling examples.

Do not look compelling at all.

--
                              Waldek Hebisch