Types

Why don't you add _t suffix to typedef-ed symbols?

There are some reasons.

• _t suffix is reserved by POSIX. Even though We don't express to support POSIX, we can't ignore it.

• We have already defined some types with no _t suffix like mrb_int. We want to keep naming consistency.

• Matz don't like _t suffix. :-p

I found a symbol without mrb_/MRB_ prefix in the header file.

I'm sorry. It is ill formed. Please report to issue tracking or send pull request.

My compiler don't support *int*_t. (and/or types may be defined in stdint.h)

It's possible even if your compiler supports C99. But it's necessary to obtain the source code portability. Please define them by yourself.

Definitions depends on your target architecture and your compiler implementation. So it's difficult to give you general guidelines. Please consult the compiler vendor.