So the reason for typedef
:ed primitive data types is to abstract the low-level representation and make it easier to comprehend (uint64_t
instead of long long
type, which is 8 bytes).
However, there is uint_fast32_t
which has the same typedef
as uint32_t
. Will using the "fast" version make the program faster?
int
may be as small as 16 bits on some platforms. It may not be sufficient for your application.uint32_t
is not guaranteed to exist. It's an optional typedef
that the implementation must provide iff it has an unsigned integer type of exactly 32-bits. Some have a 9-bit bytes for example, so they don't have a uint32_t
.uint_fast32_t
states your intent clearly: it's a type of at least 32 bits which is the best from a performance point-of-view. uint_fast32_t
may be in fact 64 bits long. It's up to the implementation.... there is
uint_fast32_t
which has the same typedef asuint32_t
...
What you are looking at is not the standard. It's a particular implementation (BlackBerry). So you can't deduce from there that uint_fast32_t
is always the same as uint32_t
.
See also: