On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 10:44 PM, Christos Zoulas <chris...@zoulas.com> wrote: > On Nov 16, 9:30pm, lourival.n...@gmail.com (Lourival Vieira Neto) wrote: > -- Subject: Re: [patch] changing lua_Number to int64_t > > | On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Christos Zoulas <chris...@astron.com> > wrote: > | > In article <52872b0c.5080...@msys.ch>, Marc Balmer <m...@msys.ch> wrote: > | >>Changing the number type to int64_t is certainly a good idea. Two > | >>questions, however: > | > > | > Why not intmax_t? > | > | My only argument is that int64_t has a well-defined width and, AFAIK, > | intmax_t could vary. But I have no strong feelings about this. Do you > | think intmax_t would be better? > > Bigger is better. And you can use %jd to print which is a big win.
I agree that bigger is better and %jd is much better then "%" PRI/SCN. But don't you think that to know the exact width is even better? Regards, -- Lourival Vieira Neto
