bpgate·5년 전·discussNo, the names are fine and self evident after glancing through K&R for 15 min.The real mistake in retrospect is that int and long are platform dependent. This is an amazing time sink when writing portable programs.For some reason C programmers looked down on the exact width integer types for a long time.The base types should have been exact width from the start, and the cool sounding names like int and long should have been typedefs.In practice, I consider this a larger problem than the often cited NULL.
The real mistake in retrospect is that int and long are platform dependent. This is an amazing time sink when writing portable programs.
For some reason C programmers looked down on the exact width integer types for a long time.
The base types should have been exact width from the start, and the cool sounding names like int and long should have been typedefs.
In practice, I consider this a larger problem than the often cited NULL.