Re: [avr-gcc-list] Makefile Procyon AVRlib vs AVR-libc and ANSI C

[Patrick Blanchard]

On Wed, 2005-10-05 at 17:01 -0700, Dave Hylands wrote:
> > The first example is what I recall reading in K&R.
> > The second method is confusing, and neither method appears to be declaring 
> > the same!
> >
> > eg.. unsigned short == u16 == uint16t ?
> >
> > thanks for helping here...and putting up with what is probably a very basic 
> > issue with GCC.
> 
> I believe that C99 introduced the uint8_t, uint16_t types as part of
> the runtime library. This means that you can rely on them being
> defined and you don't need to define them yourself.
> 
> So, code written prior to C99 tended to create their own definitions.
> People who are aware of the new types, often prefer to use them
> (myself included), since they'll be available on all compilers that
> support C99 (I believe by including the <inttypes.h> header file).
> 

OK, I'm getting it now. C99 is not included in the current version of
K&R, which was where my confusion was originating, and there are no
immediate plans for a new edition from the authors.

...
LinuxWorld.com: When will we have a C99-compliant edition of The C
Programming Language? (See Resources for a link.)

Dennis Ritchie: This is a question about which Brian [Kernighan] and I
have thought hard and long, with considerable advice and assistance via
email, Usenet, visits from our publisher, and interviews like this one.
And we're still thinking. We are prepared to announce that we have not
committed ourselves either way.
http://tinyurl.com/9h677

K&R provided a good foundation from the CVavr compiler, which is what I
dropped in favor of GCC. From the looks of CVavr, C99 compliance lags
behind GCC anyway... 
http://tinyurl.com/a2t23 

wiki link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_programming_language
Interest in supporting the new C99 features appears to be mixed. Whereas
GCC and several other compilers now support most of the new features of
C99, the compilers maintained by Microsoft and Borland do not, and these
two companies do not seem to be interested in adding such support.