From: steveo@eircom.net   
      
   On Sun, 1 Sep 2024 11:07:17 +0100   
   mm0fmf  wrote:   
      
   > On 01/09/2024 08:50, Lawrence D'Oliveiro wrote:   
   > > On Thu, 29 Aug 2024 21:33:28 +0100, druck wrote:   
   > >   
   > >> Yes stdint.h is your friend   
   > >   
   > > Unless you have an elderly code base that still hasn’t caught up with   
   > > C99 ...   
   >   
   > Or you were programming in C on an Analog Devices SHARC were char was 32   
   > bits.   
      
   	I'll bet that broke a lot of bad code :)   
      
   	Stll even in that environment a compliant compiler should still   
   provide int_t types. They'd probably have to have horrendously   
   inefficient implementations not dissimilar to the bitfields in structs but   
   they should exist. Woe betide anyone who thought they could put a char into   
   an int16_t safely though.   
      
   --   
   Steve O'Hara-Smith   
   Odds and Ends at http://www.sohara.org/   
   For forms of government let fools contest   
   Whate're is best administered is best - Alexander Pope   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)