Re: C89 compatibility question

Path	csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: C89 compatibility question
Date	Mon, 27 Jul 2015 11:51:22 -0700
Organization	None to speak of
Lines	30
Message-ID	<lnoaixo2mt.fsf@kst-u.example.com> (permalink)
References	<mp5agt$sos$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info	mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="945944de09706c9b4e29b53c9d2efdc2"; logging-data="19957"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+68M8mpd2ck/L7Igh7itpf"
User-Agent	Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock	sha1:/D4fZfofwMATa6+9sTNeYZoRVgg= sha1:02D1GjVJJ/mJRu10/6Os02BnX5c=
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.c:66457

Show key headers only | View raw

"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"

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