Subject: Re: long long vs. -ansi...
To: Peter Seebach <>
From: J.T. Conklin <>
List: current-users
Date: 04/08/1997 09:05:14
In article <> (Peter Seebach) writes:
   The solution is to hack gcc to provide a *pure extension* called, perhaps,
   __int64_t, and use that for the quad type; then no code needs to know about
   it, and we aren't producing syntax errors.

   __int64_t invokes undefined behavior, but it's not a syntax error, so it's
   fine to use it even in -ansi -pedantic.

As I mentioned in another message, I believe gcc already has an option
to allow non-ansi stuff in system header files.  I thought we were using

   We may want to look at migrating to C9X-style <inttypes.h> support,
   especially because the long long rules are changing as we speak, to
   avoid some of the cruft inherent int most current implementations.

I believe that it would be a good thing to be an early-adopter of that
header.  Unfortunately I dont have a C9X draft.  Peter, would you be 
willing to code up a inttypes.h we could integrate?