> The standard already defines - as you suggested - two categories:
> standard integer types and extended integer types.
> It could really make sense to introduce - as you called it -
> `uintmax_oversize_t` -, or better named `uintmax_extended_t` to
> cover both stand and extended types.

Wouldn't uintmax_extended_t introduce the same problem again when
vendors wants to add new bigger extended integer types in the future?