On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 9:50 AM, Stephan Beal <sgb...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 3, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Scott Robison <sc...@casaderobison.com> > wrote: > > > standards have all been ISO standards. Pedantic? Yes. Obviously DRH is > > willing to make the code more portable as long as it doesn't violate > > ANSI-C, hence his patch early in the thread (see > > https://www.sqlite.org/src/info/0d04f380e1bd17104b3cf76b64d0cfc79a726606 > ). > > > > Just to harmlessly nitpick: sqlite (necessarily) uses long long for int64, > which isn't strictly C89: but works on essentially every compiler. > Fair enough, though I think the selection of long long is wrapped up in conditionals, isn't it? Conditional blocks are there for this purpose! :) {checks} Yes: #ifdef SQLITE_INT64_TYPE typedef SQLITE_INT64_TYPE sqlite_int64; typedef unsigned SQLITE_INT64_TYPE sqlite_uint64; #elif defined(_MSC_VER) || defined(__BORLANDC__) typedef __int64 sqlite_int64; typedef unsigned __int64 sqlite_uint64; #else typedef long long int sqlite_int64; typedef unsigned long long int sqlite_uint64; #endif typedef sqlite_int64 sqlite3_int64; typedef sqlite_uint64 sqlite3_uint64; It only falls to long long if nothing better has been provided or found. -- Scott Robison _______________________________________________ sqlite-users mailing list sqlite-users@sqlite.org http://sqlite.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sqlite-users
