News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:An update on GNU performance by phkahler on Sunday October 21, 2018 @05:41PM (#18270465)
prior to C99 adoption char was usually how you got a int8_t. ascii characters are technically 7 bits, so should the extra bit be sign?

That's all just having fun, I like the consistency argument and the fact (is it a fact?) that char is signed on most platforms.

Re:An update on GNU performance by quietbritishjim on Sunday October 21, 2018 @06:31PM (#18270728)
> char was usually how you got a int8_t

Not sure if that's just a typo, but you would use a signed char, which is a different type to char even on implementations where char is signed. Part of the reason for this, of course, is because char can be unsigned so if you want a signed integer you have to specify that. But more philosophically, unsigned char and signed char are numerical types that are not meant to be characters (despite their names), whereas char is a character type that just happens to be backed by an integer.

Indeed I believe that int8_t is almost always just a typedef for signed char (but I still would use int8_t where available for clarity).