From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Fri Oct 31 03:30:30 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A385216A4CE
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 03:30:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailman.zeta.org.au (mailman.zeta.org.au [203.26.10.16])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1278543FBD
	for <current@freebsd.org>; Fri, 31 Oct 2003 03:30:29 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from gamplex.bde.org (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246])
	by mailman.zeta.org.au (8.9.3p2/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA29206;
	Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:30:18 +1100
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 22:30:17 +1100 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@gamplex.bde.org
To: Terry Lambert <tlambert2@mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <3FA238C5.40045975@mindspring.com>
Message-ID: <20031031221531.A1212@gamplex.bde.org>
References: <BAEB9CED-091F-11D8-B483-000393BB9222@queasyweasel.com> 
	<20031030120925.K80335@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> 
	<20031031174658.T3463@gamplex.bde.org>
	<3FA238C5.40045975@mindspring.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: current@freebsd.org
cc: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Anyone object to the following change in libc?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:30:30 -0000
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 11:30:30 -0000

On Fri, 31 Oct 2003, Terry Lambert wrote:

> Bruce Evans wrote:
> > ...  int8_t is
> > optional in C99 and all code that uses it unconditionally is unportable.
> > Similarly for most other types in <stdint.h>.  The required ones are
> > [u]int_least{8,16,32,64}_t and [u]int_fast{8,16,32,64}_t and [u]intmax_t,
> > i.e., nothing that can't be declared in C90 except a 64-bit type.
>
> I believe that you meant to say uint8_t is optional, and int8_t is
> required (see /usr/src/sys/*/include/_types.h).  I think this was a
> concession to IBM, which defaulted to unsigned characters, and
> lacked a "signed" keyword in its compilers.

No,  I meant what I wrote.  All fixed-width types are optional, at least
in the C99 draft (n869.txt).  There is nothing special about uint8_t vs
int8_t except that it might not exist for a different reason.

Bruce