Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbatt!ihnp4!drutx!mtuxo!mtune!codas!cpsc6a!rtech!wong
From: wong@rtech.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Time for 64-bit longs?
Message-ID: <648@rtech.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 9-Feb-87 13:16:44 EST
Article-I.D.: rtech.648
Posted: Mon Feb  9 13:16:44 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 11-Feb-87 20:09:04 EST
References: <848@epimass.UUCP> <291@mtxinu.UUCP> <629@sdchema.sdchem.UUCP>
Reply-To: wong@rtech.UUCP (J. Wong)
Organization: Relational Technology, Alameda CA
Lines: 24
Xref: watmath comp.lang.c:988 comp.unix.wizards:908

We, here at Relational Technology, have seen machines with

	long = 64 bits
	int  = 32 bits
	short = 16 bits

or, even worse,

	long = 64 bits
	int = 32 bits
	short = 32 bits!

As you might expect, this causes all sorts of problems in trying to
port code.  Seems like programmers pretty much assume "normal" (read
Vax) sizes for integers when writing code.

-- 
				J. Wong		ucbvax!mtxinu!rtech!wong

****************************************************************
You start a conversation, you can't even finish it.
You're talking alot, but you're not saying anything.
When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
Say something once, why say it again.		- David Byrne