🚀 go-pugleaf

Mike Rubenstein wrote:
 > 
 > You've missed a rather subtle point.  Such extensions are legal but
 > they do not introduce integer types.  The standard defines the signed
 > integer types as being signed char, short int, int, and long int (and
 > similarly for unsigned integer types).  An implementation may
 > introduce new types that behave like integers, but according to the
 > standard they are not integer types.
 > 
 > This is important since it guarantees, for example, that size_t is
 > unsigned char, unsigned short, unsigned int, or unsigned long.  An
 > implementation cannot define size_t as being unsigned _VeryLong
 > (assuming, of course, that unsigned _VeryLong is a new type).
 > 
 
It must be pretty subtle!   Can you cite specific Clause references to help me
sort out this distinction?