From: michael@weiser.saale-net.de (Michael Weiser) Subject: Re: long long vs long 28 Jul 1998 09:07:16 -0700 Message-ID: <35be955e.2235784.cygnus.gnu-win32@mail> References: <901200141.0020725.0@office.demon.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Timothy Writer Cc: gnu-win32@cygnus.com Hello Timothy, You wrote: [SNIP] >> Unfortunately not. I didn't know that this matters so much. >> >> BTW: Do you love splitting hairs? ;) > >In defense of the original poster, this is not splitting hairs. You yourself >invoked the _Standard_ to assert: > > 1. short is 16 bits and long is 32 bits > 2. a conforming implementation cannot use a 64 bit long > >Both statements are incorrect and such commonly held misbeliefs are a >frequent source of portability problems. Since this group is very much about >portability, its important not to spread misinformation where portability is >concerned. Okay okay, I said Jehova and now everyone is throwing stones at me. ;) I now know that my statement about the standard was thoughtless, sorry. In my little world I thought that longs are 32 bits and that almost all code relys on this. I simply didn't know about the world around my little universe. :) So sorry and till the next mindless mistake... Micha - For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to "gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".