[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher
|
From: |
Paul Eggert |
|
Subject: |
Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher |
|
Date: |
Mon, 16 Dec 2019 01:56:12 -0800 |
|
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.2.2 |
On 12/15/19 12:14 AM, address@hidden wrote:
> int64_t is just as standard as ptrdiff_t and just as clear.
Actually, int64_t is optional (as even C18 and POSIX-2018 do not require it),
whereas ptrdiff_t has been required since C89. More importantly, int64_t would
be overkill on 32-bit GNU/Linux, whereas ptrdiff_t suffices and is typically
more efficient.
(Besides, what would we do if 72-bit pointers came back into vogue? :-)
- Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher, (continued)
- Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher, arnold, 2019/12/13
- Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher, Jim Meyering, 2019/12/13
- Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher, Paul Eggert, 2019/12/13
- Re: intptr_t vs. uintptr_t, Bruno Haible, 2019/12/13
- Re: intptr_t vs. uintptr_t, Paul Eggert, 2019/12/13
- Re: intptr_t vs. uintptr_t, Bruno Haible, 2019/12/14
- Re: intptr_t vs. uintptr_t, Paul Eggert, 2019/12/14
- Re: intptr_t vs. uintptr_t, Bruno Haible, 2019/12/14
- Re: intptr_t vs. uintptr_t, Paul Eggert, 2019/12/16
- Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher, arnold, 2019/12/15
- Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher,
Paul Eggert <=
- Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher, arnold, 2019/12/16
- Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher, Paul Eggert, 2019/12/19
- Re: bug#34951: [PATCH] grep: a kwset matcher not work in a grep matcher, arnold, 2019/12/20