an oldie but a goodie .. ISO C90 does not support 'long long'

[Dennis Clarke]

On 11/2/22 18:29, Michael Wojcik via openssl-users wrote:
>> From: openssl-users <openssl-users-bounces at openssl.org> On Behalf Of Phillip
>> Susi
>> Sent: Wednesday, 2 November, 2022 11:45
>>
>> The only thing to fix is don't put your compiler in strict C90 mode.
> 
> I'm inclined to agree. While there's an argument for backward compatibility, C99 was standardized nearly a quarter of a century ago. OpenSSL 1.x is younger than C99. It doesn't seem like an unreasonable requirement.
> 
> But as Tomas wrote, anyone who thinks it is can submit a pull request.
> 


     The more that I dig into this and look at the new OpenSSL 3.x the
more I am inclined to think C99 is good enough. Everywhere. Also I doubt
that the age of the thing matters much. The portability does.

     Now I await with a flame proof suit for someone to yell "rewrite it
all in rust!"  Not bloodly likely.


-- 
Dennis Clarke
RISC-V/SPARC/PPC/ARM/CISC
UNIX and Linux spoken
GreyBeard and suspenders optional