HARRIS FLAME Re: SHORT vs. INT
Snoopy
seifert at hammer.UUCP
Thu Sep 26 02:58:04 AEST 1985
In article <274 at ccivax.UUCP> rb at ccivax.UUCP (rex ballard) writes:
>A very good example of a case where short than "int" is when communicating
>binary information between two dissimilar processors. If a 68000 compiler
>consideres int to be 16 bits, and a 68020 compiler treats it as 32 bits,
>packed structures had better be very specific.
I've got a very simple solution for this. The prototype works. When
I get it polished up to suitable professional standards I'll post it.
It's amasing how simple the solution actually is. And thus even more
amasing that noone's done it yet.
>Perhaps it is time to considere standardizing the size of char, long, and
>short. At least we should have some small "guarenteed size" of unit like
>type "byte", which could always be 8 bits unsigned (or signed- vote on it).
Have fun implementing your 8 bit bytes on machines like the CDC 6x00,
which store charactors in 6 bits. (That's right, no lower case! Yucko!)
Besides, there are going to be old compilers in use for a long time.
Snoopy
tektronix!hammer!seifert
tektronix!tekecs!doghouse.TEK!snoopy
"su" > "Permission Denied"
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list