cox@bentley.UUCP (MH Cox) (03/16/88)
I need some advice, preferrably from some one on the ANSI committee (are you listenin' Gwyn?). The proposed ANSI standard C has produced a lot of new data types: size_t, time_t, etc. I was starting to adopt their "_t" convention for my own data types, when I suddenly realized (excuse me, if this is obvious to everyone else :-) I might be headed for a type clash with a future ANSI C typedef. Did the ANSI C committe intend to reserve all typedefs of the form *_t for their own use? Should I avoid typedefs of this form in my applications? -- ========================================================================== Michael H. Cox ARPA: moss!bentley!cox@rutgers.edu AT&T Bell Labs UUCP: don't know (can anyone help?) 184 Liberty Corner Road Rm 3B-Q15 Warren, NJ 07060 (201) 580-8622 ==========================================================================
dsill@NSWC-OAS.arpa (Dave Sill) (03/17/88)
In article <1086@bentley.UUCP> MH Cox <bentley!cox> writes: >The proposed ANSI standard C has produced >a lot of new data types: size_t, time_t, etc. [This is not an answer to the posters question.] A caveat: be careful when using variables of these generic types in portable code. time_t may be int on machine X but long int on machine Y. We recently ported some UNIX accounting code that had this problem. ========= The opinions expressed above are mine. "[Programmers who prefer to drive a shift car are not] positioned to design interactive systems." -- Ted Nelson (quoted from Byte) [But Ted, there are users who really prefer a shift car...]