Rendered at 08:50:49 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Cloudflare Workers.
flowerbreeze 2 minutes ago [-]
Thank you for the article! Do I see a Turbo-C screenshot there or am I imagining it? It was my first IDE (I didn't know that's what it was called) when I started programming. I sometimes miss it, it was really good, especially the help system.
I agree with the article of course. I think most confusion comes not having learned about the purpose of having them be defined based on the architecture in the first place. It took me a long time before I stumbled upon how they really worked and why, because while I started it was either x86 or nothing. When x64 showed up, suddenly it became relevant and everybody started learning about C types more in depth as they ran into issues with sizeof.
Also, misuse in data protocols is where I think the bad reputation of the flexible type sizes came from. stdint was desperately needed for that reason and it came a bit late.
usrnm 14 minutes ago [-]
But not having fixed size integers (or integers tied to the size of a pointer) was. Both can be useful
3 minutes ago [-]
gustavopezzi 17 hours ago [-]
Author here. Thanks for sharing.
enriquto 13 minutes ago [-]
it's a great read!
would like to learn some tricks, like configuring gcc so that int is 64 bits, and so on
I agree with the article of course. I think most confusion comes not having learned about the purpose of having them be defined based on the architecture in the first place. It took me a long time before I stumbled upon how they really worked and why, because while I started it was either x86 or nothing. When x64 showed up, suddenly it became relevant and everybody started learning about C types more in depth as they ran into issues with sizeof.
Also, misuse in data protocols is where I think the bad reputation of the flexible type sizes came from. stdint was desperately needed for that reason and it came a bit late.
would like to learn some tricks, like configuring gcc so that int is 64 bits, and so on