Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site amdahl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!amdahl!gam
From: gam@amdahl.UUCP (Gordon A. Moffett)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: C needs 64-bit integers
Message-ID: <497@amdahl.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 13-Nov-84 01:40:54 EST
Article-I.D.: amdahl.497
Posted: Tue Nov 13 01:40:54 1984
Date-Received: Wed, 14-Nov-84 05:28:39 EST
References: <135@harvard.ARPA> <152@geowhiz.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Amdahl Corp, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 19

> > If you really want to add a new data type to 'C' then 'veryLong' (i.e.
> > 64bit integers) might be a lot more useful than 'bcd'.
> 
> I think that a veryLong data type would be a good addition to C.  I don't
> understand where the idea that 32 bits is enough came from anyway.  Perhaps
> it is a leftover from the days when memory was so expensive that using up
> more than 32 bits for an integer was prohibitively expensive.

Amdahl's UTS has 64-bit integers and they are of type 'long long'
(clever, eh?).  Long long constants are specified by the suffix
'LL'.  All the arithmetic operators can be used on long longs.

It would be real nice if this were the adopted standard for 64-bit
integers, as we are very proud of our long longs.  (John, are you
listening?  Jim, are you out there?).
-- 
Gordon A. Moffett		...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!gam

37 22'50" N / 122 59'12" W	[ This is just me talking. ]