What is the formal statutus of uint64_t

[Przemyslaw Koprowski]

This is the question about what the statndard of C++ says.
Unfortunately I don't have access to the standard, so I
decided to ask here.

Is the type uint64_t accepted by the current standard?
If not, is it expected for the incomming version?

If this is the case, does the standard says how to enter
uint64_t constants espacially if it happens that uint64_t
is strictly bigger than unsigned long?

BTW. I checked that on gcc uint64_t is accepted and the
constants can be enetered with postfix ull, but at least
this later thing I doubt to be in the standard, since
long long is not.

TIA,
Przemek

[Bo Persson]

Przemyslaw Koprowski wrote:

This is the question about what the statndard of C++ says.
Unfortunately I don't have access to the standard, so I
decided to ask here.

Is the type uint64_t accepted by the current standard?

No.

If not, is it expected for the incomming version?

Yes.

>
If this is the case, does the standard says how to enter
uint64_t constants espacially if it happens that uint64_t
is strictly bigger than unsigned long?

A literal is already considered to be of a type large enough to store
its value, and convertible to any wider type.

>
BTW. I checked that on gcc uint64_t is accepted and the
constants can be enetered with postfix ull, but at least
this later thing I doubt to be in the standard, since
long long is not.

C++0x will have a long long type, as well as ull. The long long type
must be at least 64 bits, but can of course be wider on some systems.
Bo Persson