Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1a 12/4/83; site rlgvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!vaxine!wjh12!genrad!decvax!ucbvax!ucbcad!tektronix!hplabs!hao!seismo!rlgvax!guy
From: guy@rlgvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards,net.lang.c
Subject: Re: unsigned char -> unsigned int conversion
Message-ID: <2025@rlgvax.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 15-Jun-84 22:39:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: rlgvax.2025
Posted: Fri Jun 15 22:39:45 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 19-Jun-84 01:26:36 EDT
References: <183@haddock.UUCP> <778@bbncca.ARPA>
Organization: CCI Office Systems Group, Reston, VA
Lines: 10

The C language does permit "unsigned short int" and "unsigned long int".
The fact that one can say "unsigned short x;" or "unsigned long x;" on many
compilers can be considered either a side-effect of the compilers being used,
or a consequence of the rules permitting "register x;" or even "x[30];" (give
a look at the "cb" source sometime).  If either K or R are reading this,
could they give an authoritative answer to the question of whether
"unsigned short x;" should be considered legal or not?

	Guy Harris
	{seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy