DS> OK - so what would that mean in practise? DS> What should the typedef name be for: DS> DS> a) unsigned 32-bit integers DS> b) signed 32-bit integers DS> c) unsigned 64-bit integers DS> d) signed 64-bit integers RS> uint32_t, int32_t, uint64_t, int64_t. RS> (There is intmax_t for the case when you simply RS> want the largest available int type.)
Thanks. So I suggest that the configure script should check for the existance of these types, and define them if they don't already exist. (And/or define a suitable token to indicate if 64-bit types are not supportable at all). RS> Though I'm not sure we'd need explicit 64 bit types. 'Cos if we don't define them now, we're bound to run into a need for them in the future! Surely it's better to think ahead, and tackle this properly in the first place? I'd suggest that we get this in place ASAP, and then worry about how best to make use of it later. Dave ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by Shop4tech.com-Lowest price on Blank Media 100pk Sonic DVD-R 4x for only $29 -100pk Sonic DVD+R for only $33 Save 50% off Retail on Ink & Toner - Free Shipping and Free Gift. http://www.shop4tech.com/z/Inkjet_Cartridges/9_108_r285 _______________________________________________ Net-snmp-coders mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/net-snmp-coders
