Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 16:12:09 +0300 (IDT)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Pasi Franti <franti AT cs DOT joensuu DOT fi>
cc: Eugene Ageenko <ageson AT cs DOT joensuu DOT fi>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Portability and size_t type related question
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.4.10.9905130944050.5527-100000@cs.joensuu.fi>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.990513161150.12629R-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Thu, 13 May 1999, Pasi Franti wrote:

> > Ok. thanx. it is like here then:
> > 
> > typedef  unsigned short    U16;
> > typedef  unsigned long     U32;
> > typedef  unsigned char     BYTE;
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> I did not follow your discussion but how did you come up to such
> conclusion? You can never be sure of how many bits are int and 
> long types without checking it!

I understood that the above is for DJGPP, in which case it is
correct.  As I said elsewhere in this thread, for any other
environment, you indeed need to find out how many bits does each type
use.

> So what makes you think that 
> unsigned long would be different case? As far as I know, it is
> more likely to be U64 as we use 32-bit compilers where int is
> 32 bits and long 64 bits.

Actually, most 32-bit compilers use 32 bits for both int and long.