X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org
From: "Dave Korn" <dave DOT korn AT artimi DOT com>
To: <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
References: <490A30C8 DOT 5000107 AT sh DOT cvut DOT cz> <001601c93b31$a961b940$4001a8c0 AT mycomputer> <003e01c93b42$e92a17a0$4001a8c0 AT mycomputer> <490AE8A0 DOT 8090009 AT sh DOT cvut DOT cz> <001a01c93b4d$617de150$4001a8c0 AT mycomputer> <490AF1E3 DOT 3020308 AT sh DOT cvut DOT cz> <007401c93b56$ebcfa510$4001a8c0 AT mycomputer> <490B0084 DOT 1070803 AT sh DOT cvut DOT cz> <008a01c93b5a$9338d300$4001a8c0 AT mycomputer> <490B078B DOT 9030007 AT byu DOT net> <20081031135011 DOT GB15518 AT calimero DOT vinschen DOT de> <490B21E9 DOT 80807 AT lysator DOT liu DOT se> <011601c93b6e$49bbb710$4001a8c0 AT mycomputer>
Subject: RE: cygwin g++ strictness
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 15:42:29 -0000
Message-ID: <02bd01c93b6f$4858d640$9601a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; 	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
In-Reply-To: <011601c93b6e$49bbb710$4001a8c0@mycomputer>
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:cygwin-unsubscribe-archive-cygwin=delorie DOT com AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com

John Emmas wrote on 31 October 2008 15:35:

> is it reasonable for a programmer to assume that a type declared as
> int32_t will be compatible with "%d" when building for a 32-bit platform?

  The /only/ assumptions you may legitimately make are those encoded in the C
language spec: sizeof (char) <= sizeof (short) <= sizeof (int) <= sizeof
(long) <= sizeof (long long).  But "<=" means less than OR equal, and you
can't assume /which/ of those two.

> I'd be surprised if there's a programmer amongst us who can honestly say
> he wouldn't have made that assumption.

  It's worked in the past.  But now there are 64-bit platforms in common use
and we all have to be aware.


    cheers,
      DaveK
-- 
Can't think of a witty .sigline today....


--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/