Re:A Special Kind of Hell: intmax_t in C and C++
by stncls on Saturday December 05, 2020 @03:54PM
(#25318238)
> Is this a practical concern?
> That seems like such a strong calling convention change
I think you are spot on here. The OP's concern may be due to things like this:
> For example, let’s take a C Standard function that uses intmax_t, imaxabs
It looks like an unusual departure from typical libc functions like strtol(), strtoll(), etc. which have a primary type right in the name. To the untrained eye, intmax_t may look like some promise of portability, when it is actually no more portable than specifying int or long.
I think you are spot on here. The OP's concern may be due to things like this:
> For example, let’s take a C Standard function that uses intmax_t, imaxabs
It looks like an unusual departure from typical libc functions like strtol(), strtoll(), etc. which have a primary type right in the name. To the untrained eye, intmax_t may look like some promise of portability, when it is actually no more portable than specifying int or long.