On Wednesday, 16 October 2019 00:26:44 PDT Andrey Semashev via Std-Proposals
wrote:
> On 2019-10-16 10:20, Thiago Macieira via Std-Proposals wrote:
> > On Wednesday, 16 October 2019 00:17:28 PDT Andrey Semashev via
> > Std-Proposals>
> > wrote:
> >> (u)int_leastN_t types are good for guaranteeing the lowest size, but
> >> they don't they don't offer much compared to (u)intN_t. Given that
> >> (u)intN_t are universally available, people don't see the point in using
> >> them.
> >
> > According to the standard (u)intN_t aren't universally required, but
> > uint_leastN_t are.
>
> Yes, but in practice they are universally available. As are (u)intptr_t.

In practice, int is 32-bit.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
   Software Architect - Intel System Software Products