Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> schrieb am Sa., 21. Nov. 2015 um 00:44 Uhr:

> Philipp Stephani wrote:
> > Maybe not likely, but not impossible.
>
> I've never run into it, and have never heard of anyone running into it. In
> contrast, there are a few machines without int64_t -- though admittedly
> rare, we
> might as well not impose obstacles to porting to them if it's easy, which
> it is
> here.
>
> intmax_t is not the only alternative. We could also use 'long long int'.
> That's
> also portable to any C99 host, and should be just as well supported as
> intmax_t
> is (it has printf formats too). 'long long int' has been around for longer
> than
> intmax_t has, so in that sense it's a more-conservative choice.
>

I'm not feeling strongly about the exact type, but I'd suggest to wait for
Daniel's input before making a final decision.