Re: [patch] changing lua_Number to int64_t

[Mouse <mouse%Rodents-Montreal.ORG@localhost>]

>> 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.

sizeof returns the number of bytes used to store an object.  This is
only loosely related to the number of data bits in the object; the
latter is no more than sizeof the object times CHAR_BIT, but it may be
lower.

Also, using an exact-width type assumes that the hardware/compiler in
question _has_ such a type.

It's possible that lua, NetBSD, or the combination of the two is
willing to write off portability to machines where one or both of those
potential portability issues becomes actual.  But that seems to be
asking for trouble to me; history is full of "but nobody will ever want
to port this to one of _those_" that come back to bite people.

/~\ The ASCII                             Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML                mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
/ \ Email!           7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B