INTL 3:770/1 3:770/3   
   REPLYADDR Pancho.Jones@proton.me   
   REPLYTO 3:770/3.0 UUCP   
   MSGID:  5be7114e   
   REPLY: <20240829102839.5bb67af25e568ebabc65ede6@eircom.net> be8e09a3   
   PID: SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
   On 29/08/2024 10:28, Ahem A Rivet's Shot wrote:   
   > On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 09:32:49 +0100   
   > Richard Kettlewell  wrote:   
   >   
   >> I don’t think I’d fault either decision though the fact that we’ve   
   ended   
   >> up with two conventions does make writing/maintaining portable code a   
   >> bit more annoying,   
   >   
   > 	Portable code should only rely on the standards not   
   > implementations, some very weird possibilities are legal within the   
   > standard.   
   >   
   > 	There are always the int_t types for when size matters.   
   >   
      
   Yes, from what I remember of the 90s, Microsoft code used typedefs,   
   Int32, Int64 or maybe even Macros for types. Big projects sometimes used   
   their own typedefs. I never liked it. I used int and long, but I   
   recognised my code was suboptimal.   
      
   Then I moved to Csharp and Java and stop worrying :-).   
      
   C was shit, for not making types explicit, subsequent OS software   
   developers were just polishing the turd.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: Agency HUB, Dunedin - New Zealand | Fido<>Usenet Gateway (3:770/3)   
   SEEN-BY: 19/38 90/1 105/81 106/201 129/305 153/757 7715 218/700 840   
   SEEN-BY: 220/70 226/17 30 100 227/114 229/110 111 114 200 206 300   
   SEEN-BY: 229/317 400 426 428 470 550 616 664 700 266/512 267/800 282/1038   
   SEEN-BY: 291/111 292/854 310/31 320/219 322/757 342/200 396/45 460/58   
   SEEN-BY: 633/280 281 412 418 420 509 2744 712/848 770/1 3 100 330   
   SEEN-BY: 770/340 772/210 220 230 5020/400 5075/35   
   PATH: 770/3 1 633/280 229/426