Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!cit-vax!news
From: news@cit-vax.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Time for 64-bit longs?
Message-ID: <1643@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Date: Fri, 30-Jan-87 00:51:31 EST
Article-I.D.: cit-vax.1643
Posted: Fri Jan 30 00:51:31 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 31-Jan-87 05:55:39 EST
References: <848@epimass.UUCP> <291@mtxinu.UUCP>
Reply-To: jon@oddhack.UUCP (Jon Leech)
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Lines: 18
Xref: watmath comp.lang.c:888 comp.unix.wizards:754

Organization : California Institute of Technology
Keywords: 
From: jon@oddhack.Caltech.Edu (Jon Leech)
Path: oddhack!jon

In article <291@mtxinu.UUCP> ed@mtxinu.UUCP (Ed Gould) writes:
>The problem is not that the VAX code assumes int == long (it often
>does make that assumption, but those are bugs) but that C defines
>only two sizes of integer: long and short.  Int may be either,
>depending on the implementation, but it must be one or the other.

	I don't think this is correct. All K&R says about it is
that 'short is no longer than long' (pg 34 sec 2.2). Why not have
short=16 bits, int=32 bits, long=64 bits?

    -- Jon Leech (jon@csvax.caltech.edu || ...seismo!cit-vax!jon)
    Caltech Computer Science Graphics Group
    __@/