On May 25, 2009, at 17:41, Nicolas Pitre wrote: > As far as my opinion matters, I don't think that uint32_t is that much > clearer than u32.
It is however what the language standard specifies, and provided by the compiler. Complaints that the C99 type definitions are so much more difficult to type are just utterly bogus. > And Linux makes for a big example where plenty of odd naming > collisions is simply not an issue in practice When the Linux kernel was started, the very idea of having a language standard was a novel concept. Regards, Anders Montonen _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
