On Mon, May 16, 2011 at 10:53:56PM +0300, Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote: > Le lundi 16 mai 2011 21:27:13 Diego Biurrun, vous avez écrit : > > The _fast integer types provide no realworld benefits, but may introduce > > portability issues and are just plain ugly. > > int_fastXX_t are in ISO C just as intXX_t. So IMHO I don't see how they are > less portable, less standard or less POSIX.
Maybe my commit message is a bit misleading - I intended for "standard counterparts" to be read as "more common counterparts that als happen to be (just as) standard", not as "counterparts that are POSIX standard, unlike the originally used types". I can adjust the log message. The int_fast types are less portable because they are a part of the standard that is actually implemented on fewer systems. Diego ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Achieve unprecedented app performance and reliability What every C/C++ and Fortran developer should know. Learn how Intel has extended the reach of its next-generation tools to help boost performance applications - inlcuding clusters. http://p.sf.net/sfu/intel-dev2devmay _______________________________________________ Libmpeg2-devel mailing list Libmpeg2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmpeg2-devel
