Re: [patch] changing lua_Number to int64_t

[Marc Balmer <marc%msys.ch@localhost>]

Am 17.11.13 04:36, schrieb Lourival Vieira Neto:
> 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?

You can always use sizeof if the need to know the size arises.