Re: CVS commit: src

[christos%astron.com@localhost (Christos Zoulas)]

In article <20131203082610.GA21739%mail.duskware.de@localhost>,
Martin Husemann  <martin%duskware.de@localhost> wrote:
>On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 10:33:05PM -0200, Lourival Vieira Neto wrote:
>> I also have no problem to step back and use 'long long', if _we_
>> choose to reconsider that. IMHO, the fact that Lua 5.3 is using 'long
>> long' is a good argument for that. I do prefer explicit width type,
>> but my main argument is that 'long long' width could be lesser than 64
>> bit.
>
>Using long long is as arbitrary as using int64_t.
>The only reasonable other choice would be intmax_t (and I'm suprised
>Lua did not pick that).
>
>However, none of these make a difference with any of the currently
>supported architectures, so this argument is of cosmetic nature.

Heh, this is why I suggested using intmax_t in the first place :-)

christos