Path: utzoo!dptcdc!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unmvax!pprg.unm.edu!hc!ames!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: sizeof (integral types)
Message-ID: <10073@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 18 Apr 89 21:09:26 GMT
References: <12005@paris.ics.uci.edu> <10044@smoke.BRL.MIL> <29127@apple.Apple.COM> <10064@smoke.BRL.MIL> <29193@apple.Apple.COM>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 17

In article <29193@apple.Apple.COM> austing@Apple.COM (Glenn L. Austin) writes:
-In article <10064@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
->In article <29127@apple.Apple.COM> austing@Apple.COM (Glenn L. Austin) writes:
->-In article <10044@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
->->longs are at least 32 bits.
->-longs are guaranteed to be at least 24 bits (according to C++, sec 2.3.1)
->That's nice, but Mr. Schmidt was inquiring about the C standard, not C++.
-Considering that C++ is an *EXTENSION* of C (and was written with K&R as
-active participants), the fact that C++ talks about longs as at least 24 bits
-is true for C as well.

(1)  C++ is NOT an extension of Standard C.  They are fundamentally
     incompatible in a few ways and are likely to remain so.
(2)  C is in no way constrained by what Mr. Stroustrup may have to say
     about the rules for C++.
(3)  The forthcoming C standard required longs to be at least 32 bits.
(4)  What do Brian and Dennis have to do with this?