Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!orsvax1!pyrnj!caip!seismo!rlgvax!hadron!jsdy
From: jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c,net.micro,net.micro.pc
Subject: Re: weird C behavior
Message-ID: <330@hadron.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 23-Mar-86 13:34:23 EST
Article-I.D.: hadron.330
Posted: Sun Mar 23 13:34:23 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 28-Mar-86 04:59:04 EST
References: <557@utastro.UUCP> <436@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Reply-To: jsdy@hadron.UUCP (Joseph S. D. Yao)
Organization: Hadron, Inc., Fairfax, VA
Lines: 26
Keywords: strange, opaque, odd
Xref: watmath net.lang.c:8279 net.micro:14141 net.micro.pc:7551
Summary: Aren't constants and args int unless otherwise declared?

In article <436@umcp-cs.UUCP> chris@umcp-cs.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes:
>In article <557@utastro.UUCP> nather@utastro.UUCP (Ed Nather) writes:
>>Here is a short C program which gives correct output according to K & R.
>>[...]  Try it on *your* 16-bit computer.
>The code contains the following [paraphrased]:
>	printf("%d\n", 36864);
>On a 16 bit machine, this should read
>	printf("%ld\n", 36864);
>One alternative is to change Ed's original program to read
>	#define BIG ((int) 36864)

Passed arguments should always be passed as an "int", I do believe.
Changing the printf specification will  n e v e r  change what the
C compiler does with the rest of the arguments!!  Nather's original
posting led me to believe he was using some kind of a 16/32 bit
machine, with a C compiler that had not quite been consistent.  I.e.,
on the comparison, all I could think was that a 16-bit int had sign-
extended to compare with an IMPLICIT long constant (look at it: it's
not an explicit long constant!).  This is inconsistent.  However, an
arg has to be explicitly declared; so the int default almost has to
be honoured.

Sorry to have to publicly disagree, Chris.
-- 

	Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy@seismo.{CSS.GOV,ARPA,UUCP}