On Sat, Jul 25, 2009 at 5:59 PM, James Cloos <cl...@jhcloos.com> wrote:
> Do note that, pedantically speaking, int32_t is not required to be 32 > bits long, just long enough to store any value which could be stored in > a 32 bit integer. Ie, it is perfectly acceptable for an arch to use a > 64 bit integer for int32_t. Or a 48 bit integer. Or 36. Plus, the > storage can have additional padding bits beyond the bits which can be > seen from C/C++/etc. > I think you are thinking of int_least32_t. While I don't have a copy of C99 handy, a 1998 draft of it I found online says in section 7.8.1.1 that int32_t (and family) are exact-width types, and may not be available if an implementation cannot provide them, while int_least32_t (and family) are guaranteed to be available, and have at least the specified size. PK
_______________________________________________ webkit-dev mailing list webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org http://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/webkit-dev
