Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!rbutterworth
From: rbutterworth@watmath.waterloo.edu (Ray Butterworth)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Are the criteria for Unix and PC compilers different?
Message-ID: <17398@watmath.waterloo.edu>
Date: 9 Mar 88 19:49:39 GMT
References: <22314ad9@ralf.home>
Organization: U of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 29

In article <22314ad9@ralf.home>, Ralf.Brown@B.GP.CS.CMU.EDU writes:
> In article <1106@silver.bacs.indiana.edu>, backstro@silver.bacs.indiana.edu (Dave White) writes:
> }When will they
> }realize that some of us really want the option of using 32-bit ints to
> }port Unix-born code?
> 
> #define int long
> Need I say more?

Yes.

I think "Unix-born" is a euphemism for "badly written" or "non-portable".

Code that assumes that "int" is 32 bits is usually written because
the programmer was lazy.  By making everything "int" he can avoid
having to make many declarations and having to include header files.

In particular, instead of having code like:
    extern int func1();
    extern int x;
    int func2(a) int a; { blah; blah; }
he will probably have:
    extern x;
    func2(a) { blah; blah; }
or maybe even
    x;
    func2(a) { blah; blah; }

"#define int long" won't help much with this code.