Re: "A diagram of C23 basic types"

Alexis <flexibeast@gmail.com> writes:

Thought people here might be interested in this image on Jens Gustedt's
blog, which translates section 6.2.5, "Types", of the C23 standard
into a graph of inclusions:
>
  https://gustedt.wordpress.com/2025/03/29/a-diagram-of-c23-basic-types/

By the way, regarding the question of why types like size_t are not
in the diagram, there is a simple explanation.  All the types shown
in the diagram are guaranteed to be distinct.[*]  Types like size_t,
ptrdiff_t, and so forth, are not new types, but simply different
names for a type already represented in the diagram.

[*] This statement assumes that a bit-precise type whose width
matches one of the standard integer types is still a distinct type.
I don't know if C23 actually follows that rule.

Editorial comment:  my understanding is that there is an asymmetry
regarding the bit-precise types, in that there is an unsigned
bit-precise type of width 1, but not a signed bit-precise type of
width 1.  Assuming that is so, IMO it is a galactically stupid
omission:  a signed bit-precise integer of width 1 would very
naturally hold the two values 0 and -1, which is a useful type to
have in some circumstances, and symmetry would be preserved.
Someone didn't have their Wheaties that morning when that decision
was made.