From: already5chosen@yahoo.com   
      
   On Wed, 7 Jan 2026 01:14:21 +0000   
   bart  wrote:   
      
   > On 07/01/2026 00:44, James Kuyper wrote:   
   > > On 2026-01-06 13:05, Michael S wrote:   
   >   
   > >> in case of using %u to print 'unsigned long' on target with 32-bit   
   > >> longs, or like using %llu to print 'unsigned long' on  target with   
   > >> 64-bit longs, then beauty wins. Easily.   
   > >   
   > > You've got it backwards. "%u" is the correct specifier to use for   
   > > unsigned long on all platforms, whether unsigned long is 32, 36, or   
   > > even 48 bits.   
   >   
   > So not "%lu"?   
   >   
   >   
      
   gcc and clang maintainers certainly think so.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)