Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!shlump.dec.com!mountn.dec.com!minow
From: minow@mountn.dec.com (Martin Minow)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: short vs. long
Message-ID: <160@mountn.dec.com>
Date: 21 May 89 21:43:01 GMT
References: <11763@well.UUCP> <19.UUL1.3#5077@aussie.UUCP>
Reply-To: minow%thundr.dec@decwrl.dec.com (Martin Minow)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Lines: 19

In article <19.UUL1.3#5077@aussie.UUCP> rex@aussie.UUCP (Rex Jaeschke) replies
to a posting that noted that the Draft standard "does not require that the
sizeof short is less than or equal to the sizeof int..."
>
>This is one of those "by a careful reading of the draft" type 
>questions. Page 23 lines 36-43 states that "... the range of values of 
>each type [signed char, short, int, long] is a subrange of the values 
>of the next type in the list."

Not to be picky, but the *range* of a value is not necessarily the same
thing as its storage requirement.  For example, on a Vax computer, float
and double have the same range, but different size (and different precision).

Or, am I reading the standard *too* carefully?

Martin Minow
minow%thundr.dec@decwrl.dec.com

The above does not represent the position of Digital Equipment Corporation.