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