https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=91480
--- Comment #2 from frankhb1989 at gmail dot com --- I agree the problem of 'L' is not likely found as a real issue in practice. Perhaps this could be forwarded as an issue of the standard which requires overspecified definitions. I don't find any intentional use cases about relying on the exactly specified type. (Despite the range limitation of int, the macro expansion results can be specified as "integer literal equal to the corresponding numerical values specified in the table" and a note about intentionally unspecified types.)
