Re: stdint module rewrite

[Bruno Haible]

Paul Eggert wrote:
> the same compiler, with
> different options) might disagree about the standard types.  So it's
> not an issue of solving the problem in general; it's an issue of how
> likely it would occur in practice, with the approach I proposed.

We are not the only people providing a <stdint.h> substitute. There are
at least two other ones, plus the system <stdint.h>.

The problem will occur as soon as these types int_fastN_t are used
in header files and - through different -I options - the compiler will
not always pick the same <stdint.h>. Different -I options in different
directories of a large package are quite frequent. It may simply be a
  -I/usr/include
which causes the system's <stdint.h> to take precedence.

By not redefining types that are already defined by the system, I
can not avoid clashes between our <stdint.h> substitute and the two
other portable ones, but at least I can avoid clashes with the system
headers.

I'll add a warning to the stdint.h substitute, not to use the int_fastN_t
types in header files.

Bruno