intptr_t is what is specified in the C99 standard. I do not intend to use
it.
For me, this is all theoretical discussion. I only use MPW for editing code
(mostly because I have 15 years worth of MPW scripts that I use). I just
happened to build a cross-platform tool to check sizes of built-in types,
and discovered that MPW does not support all the built-in types specified in
C99.
<http://www.dinkumware.com/refxc.html>
Frankly, I did not expect MPW to support C99 as it has not been maintained.
Still, stdint.h is supported in XCode, even though long double is the wrong
size.
Keith Esau
email@hidden
On 03/19/2006 7:28 AM, "Jay" <email@hidden> wrote:
> ps:
>
> Um, can I interest you in, say, just not using intptr_t?
> Why do you need a signed integer?
> Signed integers are overused.
> They have little place in "systems" programming, in most programming.
> Many buffer overflow bugs are in code that tries to correctly check sizes
> but messes up because of signed integers being used. I have a theory that
> signed integers are overused strictly because "int" is the shortest to type.
> If you are doing "math", then sure, go crazy, even use floating point.
>
>
> Maybe uintptr_t is what you really want?
> And maybe uintptr_t and size_t are pretty much guaranteed to be the same?
>
>
> Maybe stdint.h is a bit of a hairball?
>
>
> - Jay
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
MPW-Dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden
