Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site uwmcsd1.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!ihnp4!uwmcsd1!jgd
From: jgd@uwmcsd1.UUCP (John G Dobnick)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re:  int16, int32
Message-ID: <384@uwmcsd1.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 9-Aug-85 19:35:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: uwmcsd1.384
Posted: Fri Aug  9 19:35:56 1985
Date-Received: Tue, 13-Aug-85 02:38:56 EDT
References: <541@brl-tgr.ARPA> <1167@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Organization: U of Wis - Milwaukee, Computing Services
Lines: 25

>In any case, most experienced C programmers will use "short" when 16
>bits is known to suffice and "long" when 32 bits are needed.

Um, excuse me folks, but this discussion is getting very machine dependent.
Everyone seems to be assuming, at least tacitly, that "ints" come in
only two sizes: 16 bits and 32 bits.

I explicitly wish to point out that we run a UNIX implementation on a
machine that uses the following:

		short int: 18 bits
		long int:  36 bits

Said machine is a Sperry 1100.  (Sperry used to be called Univac.  Why they
changed their name, I'll never know, but they did it on April 1st!  Really!!)

I smell a ra... er, um, a VAX/PDP/68K bias here.  (:-))


-- 

--
John G Dobnick
Computing Services Division @ University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
(...ihnp4!uwmcsd1!jgd)