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