News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:ISO C is increasingly moronic by phkamp on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @05:33PM (#3375500)
You overlook the %z printf specifier which attempts, but not quite solves the problem, because size_t comes in both a signed (ssize_t) and unsigned (size_t) variant.

I usually end up doing printf("%j", (intmax_t)foo);

Re:ISO C is increasingly moronic by haberman on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @07:26PM (#3375841)
> because size_t comes in both a signed (ssize_t) and unsigned (size_t) variant.

ssize_t is not ISO C. Also, %z is a modifier, not a specifier, so you can print size_t with %zu, or ssize_t with %zd.

Re:ISO C is increasingly moronic by to3m on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @06:28PM (#3375671)
Won't "%zu" vs "%zd" do the trick? `z' is a modifier, like `l'.

(That said, I've only ever used %zu myself... don't think I've ever used ssize_t. I'm pretty sure it's non-ISO.)

Re:ISO C is increasingly moronic by caf on Tuesday December 20, 2011 @07:15PM (#3375801)
It does (other variants like `%zx` are also fine).