Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 21:55:31 01/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 12, 2003 at 22:36:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 12, 2003 at 02:26:25, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >>On January 11, 2003 at 19:23:19, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>[snip] >> >>>>>But it is a headache that could be eliminated. IE on a PC you know that >>>>>short=16, int=32, long=32 and long long=64. But _only_ on a PC. It would >>>>>be nice to know something about specific types that applies to _all_ >>>>>architectures... >>>>>int8, int16, int32 and int64 would do just fine since the older architectures >>>>>with 36, 48 and 60 bits are pretty much history... >>>> >>>>You assume that those architectures are history, that might be true today but C >>>>was not born today. >>> >>>Standards were done _recently_ again. >>> >>>three years ago in fact.. >> >>Now I really don't know what this thread is about. It is about standard C in his >>whole history (1) or is it about stantard C today (2)? > >Who cares about K&R C? No compilers I know of still follow that very old >standard. IE > >int funct (int z) is not K&R yet everyone does it that way and the current >standards define functions that way. So yes, I am talking about what I have >to use _today_, not what was around in 1975... Ok, so we narrow and focus the discussion, see below. >>If it is 1, you cannot neglect the other architectures. >>It is is 2, C99 includes the types that you want, and I don't understand then >>your criticism to the standard. > >Includes "what types that I want?" Yes, includes uint16_t, uint32_t, uint64_t etc among others. So, if you care what the standars says today, there you have them. Miguel
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.