Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!udel!haven.umd.edu!socrates.umd.edu!socrates!rockwell From: rockwell@socrates.umd.edu (Raul Rockwell) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: 64 bit architectures and C/C++ Message-ID: Date: 4 May 91 06:19:28 GMT References: <168@shasta.Stanford.EDU> <4068@inews.intel.com> <1991May1.023356.8048@trl.oz.au> <5535@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au> Sender: rockwell@socrates.umd.edu (Raul Rockwell) Followup-To: comp.lang.c Organization: Traveller Lines: 18 In-Reply-To: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au's message of 3 May 91 05: 21:14 GMT Richard A. O'Keefe: An anecdote which may be of value to people designing a C compiler for 64-bit machines: there was a UK company who built their own micro-coded machine, and wanted to put UNIX on it. Their C compiler initially had char=8, short=16, int=32, long=64 bits, sizeof (int) == sizeof (char*). They changed their compiler in a hurry, so that long=32 bits; it was less effort to do that than to fix all the BSD sources. ... eh?? any reason they couldn't have compiled with -Dlong=int ? (Or, if you wanna be fancy, you could #define long _long typedef int _long; seems rather silly to break the compiler just because of old code... Raul Rockwell