inittypes.h

Thu Aug 14 14:28:00 GMT 2003

I asked this off list, but I really should be asking it on list. Posted 
here for the archives and if anyone cares to comment.
Cheers,
Nicholas
vinschen@redhat.com wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 07:44:43PM -0400, Nicholas Wourms wrote:
>>>Corinna,
>>>>I can't really find any history on inttypes.h, but I noticed that you 
>>were the one who committed it to cvs. I would like to know how you 
>>derived the values for the macros. One of the widechar functions I've 
>>been working on uses the handy function, strtoimax... so subsequently I 
>>did a port for it and the other inttypes it as well. During this 
>>process, I noticed that there seems to be a disconnect between how 
>>you've defined some of the 32bit macros and how i386 glibc/mingw/bsd 
>>have defined them. For example, looking at int32_t(PRId32):
>>>>The bsd's: "d"
>>Glibc: "d"
>>MingW: "d"
>>Cygwin: "ld"
>>>>Am I missing something here? I searched the archives, w/o any luck. 
>>But before I submit an rfc to the main list (not to have it go in, just 
>>to get people to test), I need to know if the macros are accurate. 
>>Being that these functions are heavily asm dependant, I assume that 
>>winsup/cygwin is the most appropriate place to dump 'em?
>>> I don't understand the problem. "ld" is as correct as "d" for 32 bit
> int types. I didn't use any foreign source to create the macros but
> only the description in SUSv3:
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007904975/basedefs/inttypes.h.html
>
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/