Re: [patch] changing lua_Number to int64_t

[Lourival Vieira Neto <lourival.neto%gmail.com@localhost>]

On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Christos Zoulas 
<christos%zoulas.com@localhost> wrote:
> On Nov 16,  9:30pm, lourival.neto%gmail.com@localhost (Lourival Vieira Neto) 
> wrote:
> -- Subject: Re: [patch] changing lua_Number to int64_t
>
> | On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Christos Zoulas 
> <christos%astron.com@localhost> wrote:
> | > In article <52872B0C.5080309%msys.ch@localhost>, Marc Balmer  
> <marc%msys.ch@localhost> wrote:
> | >>Changing the number type to int64_t is certainly a good idea.  Two
> | >>questions, however:
> | >
> | > Why not intmax_t?
> |
> | My only argument is that int64_t has a well-defined width and, AFAIK,
> | intmax_t could vary. But I have no strong feelings about this. Do you
> | think intmax_t would be better?
>
> Bigger is better. And you can use %jd to print which is a big win.

I agree that bigger is better and %jd is much better then "%" PRI/SCN.
But don't you think that to know the exact width is even better?

Regards,
-- 
Lourival Vieira Neto