ISO C standard - which features need to be removed?

[Ian Collins]

good choice - not many compilers have implemented it

gcc being an obvious exception.

not sure what you mean here - the fixed width types should be used
where necessary such as interfacing to HW registers.
For most algorithm use - I would just use a "int" or "long" type with
an assert if the caller did not conform on the particular platform
that the code was compiled on

Malcolm has an obsession with 64 bit ints.

you think that the bad old days (C89) where every project rolled their
own 32, 16, 8 bit, etc unsigned integer is the way to go??

I mostly do embedded work

Malcolm doesn't!

 

[Keith Thompson]

We're not talking about the built in types. If you implement a big
integer library, what action should the code take if the division
routine is called with a denominator of zero? One answer is to
deliberately invoke undefined behaviour (probably a dvision by a
zero small integer), but that's only one answer, and probably not
the best one.

Ok. I still don't understand why you say that printing a message
to stderr is the "C standard solution" (and that's the only thing
I'm disputing here). There are any number of ways a C library can
support error detecting and reporting. Printing a message to stderr
is probably one of the worst.