On Mon, Dec 27, 2010 at 11:37 PM, Jared Maddox <[email protected]>wrote:
> Although the array can be allocated at compile-time, the example you > provide is almost guaranteed to be classified as a vararray by the > standard. i wasn't aware that static consts were "less const" than enums. i can live with that. > Incidentally, why are you being pedantic on size_t? Are you worried > about accidentally exceeding it's bounds? Not about size_t specificially, just in general. enums are int-compatible (signed), and i am overly-pedantic about numeric types because i've had so much grief with them in the past when moving code from 32- to 64-bit platforms. In fact, i don't use size_t in my own code because it has an unspecified size and has no portable printf/scanf specifier, and those have been a primary culprit when i've had problems moving between 32/64 bits. i tend to use only the fixed-size <stdint.h> types (int32_t, etc.) because of their guaranteed sizes and the portable printf/scanf specifiers provided in <inttypes.h> (both are part of C99). (That practice also makes the sizes of my structs more predictable across platforms, because of the guaranteed sizes.) > By only using the enum to > initialize the array and variable, and then using the variable > everywhere else, you should be able to get the accurate figure > everywhere, even if it isn't always the 'right' value. i agree, i just prefer to use the "proper" type and value. No big deal, though. The Standard takes precedence over my personal quirks. Thanks for the response, -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
_______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
