Re: lua_Integer in Lua 5.3

[Roberto Ierusalimschy <roberto@...>]

> I got your point. Though I think "%ll*" are also non-C89.

It is not, and nobody said it is. What I said is that long long
(and therefore "%ll*" and other long-long related stuff) is better
supported.


> > Why the message is not "format ‘%PRId32’ expects type ‘int32_t’,
> > but argument 2 has type ‘int64_t’ ?
> 
> I think that is because ...

I know that. The question was rhetorical...


> the PRI macros should expand to a character
> string literal containing a length modifier and the length modifiers
> are only specified for standard types (that is, non-extended types);
> as follows:
> 
> [...]

Note that, according to your own words, you are asking why we are using
a "standard" type instead of an "extended" one (which is optional even
in C99).

-- Roberto