Source-Changes archive

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

Re: CVS commit: src/sys/arch/next68k/next68k

On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 03:15:55PM +0700, Robert Elz wrote:
  | I'd suggest that every _t type defined (anywhere in the basic system
  | anyway) should have a PRI macro defined along with it (the sole exception
  | being types that it is impossible to print with any simple format - structs
  | and such).

I think this idea has merit.

  | I've been meaning to suggest this as a policy for some time now - originally
  | I was planning on exempting the [u]intNN_t types, but even those I believe
  | should have PRI macros.
  | After all, who can tell what format string is supposed to be used on
  | various different systems for a int32_t - it's probably %d on most
  | systems today, but on a 16 bit int system (and yes, I know, not supported
  | by NetBSD) it would need to be %ld, and perhaps more likely, if we ever
  | get a 64 bit int system, it might need to be %hd or something.

PRId32 from <inttypes.h> already exists for int32_t,
with variations for all of the [u]intNN_t sizes.

These were introduced in C99; if you want these in C++ you need
to define __STDC_FORMAT_MACROS before including the header.


Attachment: pgp7L9kPHwN4C.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index