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)