size_t + ptrdiff_t

[Sean Kelly]

On Feb 20, 2012, at 11:43 AM, Manu wrote:

> On 20 February 2012 19:21, Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw at ubuntu.com> wrote:
> 
> OK, I'm just having a trudge through druntime:
> 
> intptr_t and uintptr_t are guaranteed to match pointer size.
> https://bitbucket.org/goshawk/gdc/src/87241c8e754b/d/druntime/core/stdc/stdint.d#cl-70
> 
> c_long and c_ulong are guaranteed to match target long size (here
> would also go c_int and c_uint ;-).
> https://bitbucket.org/goshawk/gdc/src/87241c8e754b/d/druntime/core/stdc/config.d#cl-22
> 
> This needs fixing, as wchar_t may not be same size across all targets
> (some change size of wchar_t based on compile time switches).
> https://bitbucket.org/goshawk/gdc/src/87241c8e754b/d/druntime/core/stdc/stddef.d#cl-28
> 
> This needs fixing, as wint_t may not be same size across all targets.
> https://bitbucket.org/goshawk/gdc/src/87241c8e754b/d/druntime/core/stdc/wchar_.d#cl-29
> 
> --
> Iain Buclaw
> 
> *(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
> 
> It seems the problem is already MUCH worse than in D already :( .. this was precisely my fear.
> Why all these redundant aliases? Just for C compatibility?

core.stdc is an interface to the C99 API, so everything is preserved verbatim.  c_long and c_ulong were added because the size of C long differs between Windows and non-Windows x86_64 platforms.  Typically, int, short, etc are the same however, which is why there's currently no c_int--it was just a needless complication at the time.  The aliases for D users, if the exist at all, should be separate.