Am 17.11.13 04:36, schrieb Lourival Vieira Neto: > On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Christos Zoulas <chris...@zoulas.com> wrote: >> On Nov 16, 9:30pm, lourival.n...@gmail.com (Lourival Vieira Neto) wrote: >> -- Subject: Re: [patch] changing lua_Number to int64_t >> >> | On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Christos Zoulas <chris...@astron.com> >> wrote: >> | > In article <52872b0c.5080...@msys.ch>, Marc Balmer <m...@msys.ch> wrote: >> | >>Changing the number type to int64_t is certainly a good idea. Two >> | >>questions, however: >> | > >> | > Why not intmax_t? >> | >> | My only argument is that int64_t has a well-defined width and, AFAIK, >> | intmax_t could vary. But I have no strong feelings about this. Do you >> | think intmax_t would be better? >> >> Bigger is better. And you can use %jd to print which is a big win. > > I agree that bigger is better and %jd is much better then "%" PRI/SCN. > But don't you think that to know the exact width is even better?
You can always use sizeof if the need to know the size arises.
