Note: When I refer to uintptr_t know that I'm talking about both uintptr_t and intptr_t
I will be honest that this is technically correct according to the c++ standard, which states that a uintptr_t must be an integer type capable of storing a pointer, and if uintptr_t is greater than the size of a pointer then it is capable of storing a pointer.
I'm mostly logging this to see if this is an oversight or intentional, as most people assume that a uintptr_t is the size of a pointer.
If this is determined to be an issue, then it's likely due to ppu-gcc defining __PTRDIFF_TYPE__ as long int
Note: When I refer to
uintptr_tknow that I'm talking about bothuintptr_tandintptr_tI will be honest that this is technically correct according to the c++ standard, which states that a
uintptr_tmust be an integer type capable of storing a pointer, and ifuintptr_tis greater than the size of a pointer then it is capable of storing a pointer.I'm mostly logging this to see if this is an oversight or intentional, as most people assume that a
uintptr_tis the size of a pointer.If this is determined to be an issue, then it's likely due to ppu-gcc defining
__PTRDIFF_TYPE__aslong int