I realize I used FOSS improperly, I had no reason to single it out; my comment reads like a critique of open source which was not my intention. My intention wa

I realize I used FOSS improperly, I had no reason to single it out; my comment reads like a critique of open source which was not my intention. My intention was to make a good case for old code being compiled today by third parties. But to my understanding intmax_t was introduced in C99, before widespread dominance of 64 bits platforms. So it would not be surprising that there exists code with lower assumptions about its size. But actually I made also another mistake, the major problem had little to do with faulty logic and more to do with dynamic linking [0] I will see myself out today. [0] https://thephd.dev/intmax_t-hell-c++-c https://thephd.dev/intmax_t-hell-c++-c