Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!lll-tis!ames!rutgers!bellcore!faline!ulysses!mhuxt!m10ux!rgr
From: rgr@m10ux.UUCP (Duke Robillard)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C machine
Message-ID: <461@m10ux.UUCP>
Date: 30 Dec 87 18:10:17 GMT
References: <7535@alice.UUCP> <8226@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> <461@auvax.UUCP> <163@bhjat.UUCP>
Reply-To: rgr@m10ux.UUCP (Duke Robillard)
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Murray Hill
Lines: 19

In article <163@bhjat.UUCP> bhj@bhjat.UUCP writes:
>I hold that a short is defined as ALWAYS being 16 bits, and a long as
>ALWAYS being 32 bits.....
>So, on a 64-bit processor, what's an int?  For that matter, on machines larger
>than 32 bits, what would short and long be?  


According to our Cray programmers, on that 64-bit processor, a byte, a short,
an int, and a long are all 64 bits.  kinda weird.  It must make something
really fast....


...
...


-- 
  |      Duke Robillard           {ihnp4!}m10ux!rgr                    |
  |      AT&T Bell Labs           m10ux!rgr@ihnp4.UUCP                 |
  |      Murray Hill, NJ          This page accidentally left blank    |
  +--------------------------------------------------------------------+