home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!cimshop!davidm
- From: davidm@consilium.com (David S. Masterson)
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
- Subject: Re: "long long" and C++
- Message-ID: <DAVIDM.92Dec16212040@consilium.com>
- Date: 17 Dec 92 05:20:40 GMT
- References: <Bz9M1x.8vp@fig.citib.com> <1992Dec15.182228.23669@taumet.com>
- Sender: root@cimshop.UUCP
- Distribution: comp
- Organization: Consilium Inc., Mountain View, California
- Lines: 30
- In-reply-to: steve@taumet.com's message of 15 Dec 92 18:22:28 GMT
- X-Posting-Software: GNUS 3.13 [ NNTP-based News Reader for GNU Emacs ]
-
- >>>>> On 15 Dec 92 18:22:28 GMT, steve@taumet.com (Steve Clamage) said:
-
- > The next C standard will probably support an integer type longer than
- > type long. The C++ Committee has no proposals that I know of for
- > adding such a type. When it is added to C, it will certainly be
- > added to C++. If the ANSI C numerical extensions group decides on a
- > longer integer type and it looks likely to be included in C, I would
- > expect the C++ Committee to adopt it. It is thus possible that C++
- > will have it officially before C, if only due to timing.
-
- > Whether the longer type will be called "long long" or something else is
- > anyone's guess.
-
- I've heard a lot of talk about "long long", but never understood why C would
- need new syntax to represent a 64-bit integer. Is there anything wrong with:
-
- char - 8 bits
- short - 16 bits
- int - 32 bits (16 on 16-bit architecture)
- long - 64 bits (32 on 16-bit architecture)
- long long - 128 bits (64 on 16-bit architecture)
-
- --
- ====================================================================
- David Masterson Consilium, Inc.
- (415) 691-6311 640 Clyde Ct.
- davidm@consilium.com Mtn. View, CA 94043
- ====================================================================
- "Bureaucracy is a giant mechanism operated by pygmies."
- -- Honore de Balzac
-