2 ms·

> they produced the next version of unextensible shit so now int128 can't be added It's hard to think of something more "added" (or, for that matter, more "ext

by addaon 3mo ago

> they produced the next version of unextensible shit so now int128 can't be added It's hard to think of something more "added" (or, for that matter, more "extensible") than `_BitInt(128)`.

mike_hock 3mo ago
It has been tacked on as a "totally not an integer" type because the integer system isn't extensible enough to accommodate it. It could of course be added with an ABI break (bumping intmax_t to int128), but that's not being done because it would be an ABI break. Hence, not extensible in practice.