Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Programming > C Programming > intptr_t standard?

Reply
Thread Tools

intptr_t standard?

 
 
nikanth@gmail.com
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-07-2006
Isn't intptr_t part of the latest ISO C++?
It is part of the C99 standard but C++? Has any new standard for C++
after C++ 2003 which is almost same as C++98 published?
Which are the compilers that supports it completely?

on gcc (GCC) 3.3.3 (SuSE Linux) I dont get any error when using
intptr_t even after specifying -std=c89

http://www.informit.com/guides/conte...eqNum=223&rl=1

Is any new standard for C published after C99?

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Richard Heathfield
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-07-2006
http://www.velocityreviews.com/forums/(E-Mail Removed) said:

[OT stuff snipped]

> on gcc (GCC) 3.3.3 (SuSE Linux) I dont get any error when using
> intptr_t even after specifying -std=c89


A diagnostic is required - and gcc gives one when invoked in conforming
mode:

foo.c:8: `intptr_t' undeclared (first use in this function)

> Is any new standard for C published after C99?


Not yet. Give them time.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Keith Thompson
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-07-2006
(E-Mail Removed) writes:
> Isn't intptr_t part of the latest ISO C++?
> It is part of the C99 standard but C++? Has any new standard for C++
> after C++ 2003 which is almost same as C++98 published?
> Which are the compilers that supports it completely?


We don't know. This is comp.lang.c. comp.lang.c++ is down the hall,
third door on the left, just past the water cooler.

> on gcc (GCC) 3.3.3 (SuSE Linux) I dont get any error when using
> intptr_t even after specifying -std=c89
>
> http://www.informit.com/guides/conte...eqNum=223&rl=1


intptr_t is defined in <stdint.h>, which is a new standard header in
C99. As far as C89/C90 is concerned, <stdint.h> is a non-standard
header; #including it and using declarations from it doesn't warrant a
warning any more than using any other non-standard header.

> Is any new standard for C published after C99?


There's not a full standard, but there have been two Technical
Corrigenda. A version of the C99 standard with TC1 and TC2 merged
into it is freely available as n1124.pdf (Google it).

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) (E-Mail Removed) <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Passing intptr_t to a function with void * prototype. Jeroen Schot C Programming 4 10-06-2010 08:12 PM
Messing with intptr_t Richard Tobin C Programming 2 10-11-2006 02:00 AM
intptr_t king C++ 5 08-07-2006 10:53 AM



Advertisments