Le 29/06/2011 15:32, Bron Gondwana a écrit :
On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 02:21:17PM +0200, Julien Coloos wrote:
Hi there,
...
Leaving aside legacy data, the question is how to handle new ones
(like the feature I worked on) ? Should we:
- keep on using typedef and #define, even if we now only use
64-bits types: in that case it is easier to change the data type if
needed (Who will ever need more than 640kB memory ? ;p)
or
- just use plain "(unsigned) long long / (u)int64_t" types and
associated printf formats
I vote for using (u)int64_t and associated formats everywhere.
And stripping all the other stuff. I did an informal poll and
discovered that approximately nobody compiles anywhere that
doesn't offer a longlong type. Even on 32 bit platforms.
The future is now people.
In that case, should there be some kind of fallback for people using
compilers that do not support C99 ?
Because while there should not be much issues concerning the existence
of (u)intXX_t types, the macro format specifiers usually defined in
inttypes.h (e.g. PRId64 and PRIu64 for signed/unsigned 64-bits number)
may not be present.
From time to time I like to do such changes, leaving aside "legacy"
stuff. But people that are not up-to-date with standards may not like it
as much as I do ;)
Regards
