Re: [C++11] Reclaiming fixed-point suffixes for user-defined literals.

[Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>]

On 6 November 2011 15:40, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>
> I think a better example is atomics support in C++11 and C11, where
> std::atomic<int> aka std::atomic_int can be exactly the same
> representation as _Atomic int and are compatible, but the C++ library
> solution also allows std::atomic<FooBar> which C doesn't. ?A *lot* of
> work went into ensuring the C++ atomics support included a subset that
> would be implementable in C.
>
> Why couldn't the same be done for _Fract?

My point here, in case it wasn't clear, is that a C++ compiler doesn't
need to support _Atomic as a specifier, but code can be written to
work with both C and C++ anyway.