Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!ames!ptsfa!well!msudoc!umich!jtr485
From: jtr485@umich.UUCP (Johnathan Tainter)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Standard int sizes
Message-ID: <114@umich.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 19-Apr-87 00:29:35 EST
Article-I.D.: umich.114
Posted: Sun Apr 19 00:29:35 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 24-Apr-87 01:17:49 EST
References: <6759@brl-adm.ARPA> <230@ems.UUCP> <170@vianet.UUCP> <764@hoqax.UUCP>
Organization: EECS, University of Michigan
Lines: 15

In article <764@hoqax.UUCP>, twb@hoqax.UUCP (BEATTIE) writes:
> > #define int16  int

> It is not a good idea to use #define where you mean typedef.
> Think about the difference between:

> typedef int *INT_PTR;
> INT_PTR a, b;
>--Tom.

Your objection is not really valid for the int16 case.
However, there is the fact that you will get more cryptic errors
if you ever try to use int16 as a variable or function name.

--j.a.tainter