Re: flex beta 2.5.23 released

[John Millaway]

> As distributed, flex 2.5.23 doesn't work w/o the macro (because
> the appropriate header is not included) or with the macro (because
> of a syntax error in the path taken by the preprocessor when the
> macro is defined).  So after all of the contortions, flex still
> doesn't build as distributed on some ANSI- and POSIX-compliant
> systems.

Which systems?


> The *root* problem is that the intN_t types are inherently
> non-portable:
> * they are optional, even in C99, which means that there are
> ANSI-compliant systems that don't define them

Really? Which systems? I could have used `int_least32_t', etc.,
instead, which are required by C99 -- but I found that  platforms
which define int_least32_t also define int32_t also. If you find a
standards-compliant platform that defines int_least32_t but NOT
int32_t, let me know.