Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!ptsfa!ihnp4!chinet!steinmetz!davidsen
From: davidsen@steinmetz.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: 64 Vs 32
Message-ID: <1336@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 27-Mar-87 12:05:08 EST
Article-I.D.: steinmet.1336
Posted: Fri Mar 27 12:05:08 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 29-Mar-87 11:00:22 EST
References: <3810013@nucsrl.UUCP> <28200016@ccvaxa>
Reply-To: davidsen@kbsvax.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr)
Distribution: world
Organization: General Electric CRD, Schenectady, NY
Lines: 20
Keywords: 370 64 bits

In article <1500@masscomp.UUCP> hank@masscomp.UUCP (Hank Cohen) writes:
% .....
%     What Chuck may be thinking about are the 64 bit long integers
%supported by UTS C.  These things used to be called longs but when UTS
%went public people were porting vax and pdp-11 UNIX applications to
%UTS and the tendency of DEC programmers to treat longs and ints
%interchangably led to problems when longs were 64 bits.  Personally I
%liked having chars shorts ints and longs all different lengths but the
%market prevailed and longs became long longs (Yecch!!).  I don't know

Unless the X3J11 standard has changed since I left the
committee, there was a beastie called a "long double" in the
language, at the request of Cray Research. I ran some stuff on a
Cray, and having long, short, and int all the same size is a
good portability test.
-- 
bill davidsen			sixhub \
      ihnp4!seismo!rochester!steinmetz ->  crdos1!davidsen
				chinet /
ARPA: davidsen%crdos1.uucp@ge-crd.ARPA (or davidsen@ge-crd.ARPA)