On Thu, Apr 18, 2024 at 8:47 PM Peter Eisentraut <peter@eisentraut.org> wrote:
> I'm not sure I understand the problem here. Do you mean that in theory
> a platform's PRId64 could be something other than "l" or "ll"?
Yes. I don't know why anyone would do that, and the systems I checked
all have the obvious definitions, eg "ld", "lld" etc. Perhaps it's an
acceptable risk? It certainly gives us a tidier result.
For discussion, here is a variant that fully embraces <inttypes.h> and
the PRI*64 macros.
