> The real question is, is this a direction we want to go in?  If so, we
> start using int64_t for long long, int32_t for long, int32_t for int,
> and int16_t for short.  Then, when none of our code cares which is which,

Actually I'd use int for int and its size should be optimized for the
processor and it should be the type you use when you want an integral
type and you don't care wether it is 16, 32 or 64 bits - the majority
of code.

Apart from that, I would stick with old-style function definitions and
using __P() for prototypes.  Functions that need stdargs are the only
ones that need new-style function definitions to be guaranteed to
work.  Functions that have fixed args lists with all args of size int
or greater work correctly with old or new style definitions.

Half the reason I enjoy having source to NetBSD is so that I can take
code from it and port it to other OS's like SunOS, HP-UX etc.  Yes
some vendors do still ship crippled compilers with their systems.

--sjg