Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:8056 comp.lang.fortran:538
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.fortran
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!dgp.toronto.edu!flaps
From: flaps@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal)
Subject: Re: ANSI C & Fortran 8x - Expand cpp to partially support generalized precision
Message-ID: <8803121741.AA26328@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>
Organization: University of Toronto
References: <44981@sun.uucp>
Date: Sat, 12 Mar 88 12:41:08 EST


[In editing David Hough's article below, I have taken representative
 paragraphs.  -ajr]

In article <44981@sun.uucp> dgh%dgh@Sun.COM (David Hough) writes:
>Comment #26, Section 3.8.8 and 2.2.4.2: predefine generalized precision macros
>...
>__int__(p) is evaluated to the name of the smallest signed int type
>that contains all the signed p-digit integers, i. e. the interval
>[-(10**p)+1,10**p-1].
>...

Useable but not very useful.  Also not sufficiently well defined.  What
is its value for p > log10(LONG_MAX)?  Also, your macros are very
different from all other preprocessing macros in that they don't simply
substitute to a string (with possible replacements from the arguments).
Also also, nowhere else does the preprocessor know about names of types.

>__INTEGER__(p) is evaluated to the Fortran name of the type corresponding
>to __int__(p), or to INTEGER if no Fortran compiler is supported.
>...

Since no Fortran compiler is supported by the ANSI C standard, you
can just say "INTEGER".  The C standard does not mandate a separate
preprocessor, nor should it.  That would be the domain of a
Preprocessor Standard.  It seems like that is what you are proposing.
Perhaps you should write one, or get someone else to write one.

ajr
-- 
If you had eternal life, would you be able to say all the integers?