Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: C89 compatibility question |
| Date | 2015-07-27 11:51 -0700 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <lnoaixo2mt.fsf@kst-u.example.com> (permalink) |
| References | <mp5agt$sos$1@dont-email.me> |
"Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> writes:
> I have this code so far to read a JFIF file and prehaps put it in a
> wrapper of sorts.
>
> Struct JFIF_HEAD {
> uint8_t SOI={0xff,0xd8};
It's "struct", not "Struct".
> Not much I know. But I am already going to have to use stdint.h which is
> fine for me; but not C89. Is there an unsigned int that can be 8 bit in C89?
> The only thing in C89 I know of that is 8 bit is a char. If I remember
> correctly without going back and looking. I'm pretty confident I'm right.
>
> Could anything C89 replace uint8_t?
unsigned char is very likely to be the same as uint8_t. It's not
guaranteed (which is why uint8_t was added by C99), but it's easily
checked by examining the value of UCHAR_MAX in <limits.h>.
There are C89-compatible implementations of <stdint.h>. One of them is
here: http://www.lysator.liu.se/(nobg)/c/q8/index.html
Why are you restricted to C89?
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 09:10 -0400
Re: C89 compatibility question Philipp Klaus Krause <pkk@spth.de> - 2015-07-27 17:50 +0200
Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 12:25 -0400
Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:36 -0400
Re: C89 compatibility question Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2015-07-27 19:54 +0200
Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:23 -0400
Re: C89 compatibility question Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-07-27 17:24 -0700
Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-28 13:57 -0400
Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:27 -0400
Re: C89 compatibility question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-27 11:51 -0700
Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 14:53 -0400
Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-27 18:10 -0400
Re: C89 compatibility question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-27 16:22 -0700
Re: C89 compatibility question "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-28 09:28 -0400
Re: C89 compatibility question Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-07-28 10:36 -0700
csiph-web