Talk:Size t

Archived this: http://www.codeproject.com/KB/architecture/20ISSUES64BIT.aspx

Here: http://www.webcitation.org/63OJ52xov Hethrir (talk) 18:53, 22 November 2011 (UTC)

Could someone add that the "ANSI/ISO Standard signed variant of size_t" is ptrdiff_t ? I dunno how to edit without screwing up.

Could someone please decide if the following statement is true: "It was probably introduced by the second edition of the POSIX 1003.1 standard (1003.1-1996)." There really should not be any uncertainty about whether a published document defines ssize_t or not. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.2.210.104 (talk) 02:29, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

As I recall, size_t was originally undefined as to whether it was signed or unsigned. C99 fixed this, but it amounted to a nightmare problem in the early days, when some compilers used a signed type for it. A note warning people that implementations may exist with signed size_t, or that code may exist that treats size_t as possibly signed, would be a good thing here. 199.46.198.230 (talk) 17:41, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Could someone add an example? I came to this page without knowing what this is, and I still don't know. Publish your puzzles in puzzle magazines please, not on wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.97.230.61 (talk) 10:35, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Merge to C data types
This article has very low potential to become an encyclopedic article. Notability is questionable. Possible expansion most probably fail WP:NOTMANUAL. The C data types includes the section about size_t. I suggest this article to be merged there. 1exec1 (talk) 16:20, 15 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I've added missing details to the C data types article. Since I've got no input from other editors, I've merged the articles. If you don't agree, please read WP:CFORK for a policy relevant to this merge. 1exec1 (talk) 17:06, 18 December 2011 (UTC)