Related articles |
---|
sizeof(int) in 64-bit C compilers d.sand@ix.netcom.com (1995-12-17) |
Re: sizeof(int) in 64-bit C compilers ganswijk@xs4all.nl (Jaap van Ganswijk) (1995-12-18) |
Re: sizeof(int) in 64-bit C compilers larryr@cybergate.com (Larry Rau) (1995-12-18) |
Re: sizeof(int) in 64-bit C compilers streich@roo.mti.sgi.com (1995-12-19) |
Re: sizeof(int) in 64-bit C compilers d.sand@ix.netcom.com (1995-12-19) |
Re: sizeof(int) in 64-bit C compilers kennell@cs.purdue.edu (Richard L. Kennell) (1995-12-19) |
Re: sizeof(int) in 64-bit C compilers karsten@tdr.dk (1995-12-28) |
Re: sizeof(int) in 64-bit C compilers anton@complang.tuwien.ac.at (1995-12-28) |
From: | anton@complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | 28 Dec 1995 17:23:00 -0500 |
Organization: | Compilers Central |
References: | 95-12-146 |
Keywords: | C, architecture, comment |
Status: | OR |
karsten@tdr.dk (Karsten Nyblad) writes:
|> It seems to me that it is a de facto standard that int is 32 bit and
|> the size of long is the size of pointers.
The de-facto UNIX C standard before 64-bit machines was:
sizeof(int)==sizeof(pointer) (either 16 or 32 bits), and long was 32
bits. Now we don't have a de-facto standard. The old de-facto standard
was very sensible, since "int" is not just another type in C.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
[This is definitely the last message on this topic, since now it's resolved.
-John]
--
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.