Thanks for that, that&#x27;s pretty interesting to read about. Admittedly, I&#x27;m not sure I&#x27;ve ever actually <i>used</i> a int_fastN_t type in my code - I just kinda assumed they served their purpose. Reading that log I can see the obvious problems with those types which I never realized since I never really looked into them that much. int_least16_t seems like a perfectly fine substitute though, I don&#x27;t really know why int_leastN_t and int_fastN_t would be different in the first place.<p>That said, there&#x27;s really no way to correctly pick the &quot;perfect&quot; integer size for every platform - There&#x27;s just too many variables. IMO I much prefer to just use &#x27;int&#x27; when I know the values are going to be small - smaller then a 16-bit value - and I don&#x27;t care about the actual width. But obviously it&#x27;s a hot topic for some - As long as you follow the standard in regards to it&#x27;s size then it doesn&#x27;t really matter <i>what</i> integer value you choose to use. I prefer saving the fixed-width integer types for situations when I <i>know</i> I need such a size.