[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Dynamic loading progress

From: Paul Eggert
Subject: Re: Dynamic loading progress
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 12:32:21 -0800
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0

Philipp Stephani wrote:
Daniel felt pretty strongly about using int64 for fixnums.

As I recall, he felt that we shouldn't use EMACS_INT in the module API, and int64_t was merely a means to that goal. If so, that's not a reason to prefer int64_t over intmax_t; it's merely a reason to make sure that intmax_t is at least as portable as int64_t is in this area. Which it is.

> Is there any reason to change that?

Yes, int64_t is not required by POSIX, C99, etc. That is, int64_t is an optional type. In contrast, intmax_t is required on all C99 platforms, and it has better support (e.g., there's a printf format specifier for it), so there are advantages to intmax_t over int64_t. I don't know of any advantage int64_t would have over intmax_t on any platform that Emacs supports.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]