Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Don't be fooled by cpp.sh
Date: Tue, 17 Dec 2019 22:08:02 -0800
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <87fthiupx9.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References: <70391932-ccbc-4bc7-b693-881ab06eb6d3@googlegroups.com> <qt35ir$f1o$2@dont-email.me> <d526bf37-7986-4538-8b71-6f3f3e5f5b3d@googlegroups.com> <wbdJF.6510$O9t.3420@fx36.am4> <356f42b0-2919-4e72-a1a2-3813212973f1@googlegroups.com> <7f5255fa-f634-4dc7-9f33-409acc47356c@googlegroups.com> <qt71ni$128$1@dont-email.me> <a5d2c6e9-f755-4a1c-90c1-60b3d5f41649@googlegroups.com> <a6a63628-8c28-4500-a6bb-ac028a854b10@googlegroups.com> <2a6b4b2d-283f-4b5f-9f4c-025efaa087a8@googlegroups.com> <qt7g4h$2l0$1@dont-email.me> <qt7t3h$a2l$1@dont-email.me> <qt8824$coh$1@dont-email.me> <87v9qgvw28.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <qt8r9o$a9i$1@dont-email.me> <878snbwq5h.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <qtan22$t3o$1@dont-email.me> <87r213ui3i.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <qtaq7j$glq$1@dont-email.me> <87o8w6vihg.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <qtbg8f$v2o$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="470b1b9b5f98d11bf7d3e8bc2905d869"; logging-data="25269"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18c5nayUTUKgNFEoUNKu3N5"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:L69pZa7yide7QyEyLcn22C9d7KQ= sha1:WBUE2/pyQDknInwJDILvgzEFyUQ=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:70553

David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes:
[...]
> Certainly (based on other discussions involving gcc developers) the
> lack of 128-bit integer constants is viewed as one reason why __int128
> is not a "full" integer type to the same degree as the other integer
> types. (With the maxint_t issue being another key reason, and lack of
> support in library functions such as printf, *abs, strto*, etc., being
> others.)

It's intmax_t, not maxint_t.  (I've seen this misspelling several times
in this thread.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
    [Note updated email address]
Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */