Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!lll-tis!ohlone!lll-winken!csustan!csun!aeusesef
From: aeusesef@csun.UUCP (Sean Eric Fagan)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re:  Long integers
Message-ID: <749@csun.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 15-Sep-87 11:27:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: csun.749
Posted: Tue Sep 15 11:27:52 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 18-Sep-87 01:53:34 EDT
References: <9266@brl-adm.ARPA>
Reply-To: aeusesef@csun.UUCP (Sean Eric Fagan)
Organization: California State University, Northridge
Lines: 25

In article <9266@brl-adm.ARPA> moss@BRL.ARPA (Gary S. Moss (SLCBR-VL-V)) writes:
>George,
>	The format %ld is wrong when using the PRINTF family of functions.
>The reason for this is that integer arguments are *always* widened to LONG
>when passed in to a function, so the %d format is meant for LONGS.  This
>is also true for %f.  I am not certain, but pretty sure that I have gotten
>wrong behavior when using %ld in this context on certain hardware.
>
>~moss

Uhm, I think you're going to get a lot of flack about this, so I'll start
it.  C does *NOT* convert integer arguments to longs unless a)told to (via
(long) typecast or a 'L' at the end of the suffix) or b)needs to because it
is used in an expression where one of the subexpressions is a long (did that
make sense?).  Remember, this all comes from a PDP-11, where having longs
meant extra work for the cpu.  Floats are, however, converted to doubles.
Of course, I could be wrong, but I don't believe so.

 -----

 Sean Eric Fagan          Office of Computing/Communications Resources
 (213) 852 5742           Suite 2600
 1GTLSEF@CALSTATE.BITNET  5670 Wilshire Boulevard
                          Los Angeles, CA 90036
{litvax, rdlvax, psivax, hplabs, ihnp4}!csun!aeusesef
"Tempus fugit AirCal"