From: "John M. Aldrich" <fighteer AT cs DOT com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: 64 bit integers ??!?
Date: Mon, 19 Jan 1998 19:10:03 -0500
Organization: Two pounds of chaos and a pinch of salt.
Lines: 20
Message-ID: <34C3EB5B.3179@cs.com>
References: <69tlsd$lk2 AT examiner DOT concentric DOT net> <34C34232 DOT 1DC AT oce DOT nl> <6a074r$gu4 AT examiner DOT concentric DOT net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp205.cs.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Precedence: bulk

Andy Fung wrote:
> 
> Strange, since an int is 32bit, I wonder 64bit integer are not declared at
> long int instead.

To comply with the ANSI standard (actually, ANSI says longs can be >= 32
bits, but...) and keep most programs that assume long to be 32 bits from
breaking.  Besides, the 80x86 architecture, which is what DJGPP targets,
is not a 64-bit architecture, so in order to use 64-bit integers the
compiler must go through some hoops that slow code down.  Making a
standard data type suffer from this kind of performance loss is a very
bad idea.

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
|      John M. Aldrich       | "It may be better to be a live jackal|
|       aka Fighteer I       | than a dead lion, but it is better   |
|   mailto:fighteer AT cs DOT com   | still to be a live lion."            |
| http://www.cs.com/fighteer |                - Lazarus Long        |
---------------------------------------------------------------------