cygwin g++ strictness
Gary R. Van Sickle
g.r.vansickle@worldnet.att.net
Sat Nov 1 04:02:00 GMT 2008
> From: Eric Blake
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> According to John Emmas on 10/31/2008 9:35 AM:
> > question - when programming like this:-
> >
> > int32_t i = 32;
> > printf("%d", i);
> >
> > is it reasonable for a programmer to assume that a type declared as
> > int32_t will be compatible with "%d" when building for a
> 32-bit platform?
>
> It is not portable to platforms with 16-bit int (although
> these days, such platforms are museumware).
That, or:
- Running your car's engineware.
- Exploding an airbag into your face on detecting a collisionware.
- Recording your vital signsware.
- Pumping insulin into youware.
- Doing your laundyware
- Computerized exercise machinewear
- Microwaveware
- A billion other products with 8- and 16-bit microcontrollers in themware.
CSci doesn't begin and end with the CPU currently on our desks!
> You can probably
> ignore the warning on 32-bit platforms, but the better fix is
> to make your code portable by using <inttypes.h>.
>
Well, yeah. There's always the option to not Do The Right Thing(tm), but my
personal experience is that correct way is usually also the easiest way.
--
Gary R. Van Sickle
--
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/
More information about the Cygwin
mailing list