Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ho95e.UUCP Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!lll-crg!dual!qantel!ihnp4!houxm!ho95e!wcs From: wcs@ho95e.UUCP (Bill.Stewart.4K435.x0705) Newsgroups: net.lang.c Subject: Re: (Guy) HARRIS FLAME Re: SHORT vs. INT Message-ID: <161@ho95e.UUCP> Date: Fri, 13-Sep-85 11:54:46 EDT Article-I.D.: ho95e.161 Posted: Fri Sep 13 11:54:46 1985 Date-Received: Thu, 19-Sep-85 03:11:34 EDT References: <1390@brl-tgr.ARPA> <687@sfmag.UUCP> Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ Lines: 17 > > 2. NETWORK COMMUNICATION > > To enable network communication between different machines, a "short" is > > guaranteed to be 16-bits and a "long" is guaranteed to be 32-bits. This > > is either convention or standard, I am not sure which. > The C language guarantees only that "short" is no longer than "long". There > is no guarantee of any width of "short", "int", or "long" other than that! (I don't have the standard within reach, but:) The draft ANSI C standard demands that short>=16 bits and long >=32 bits, as well as long>=short. > byte is just about any size you like (5, 6, 7, 8, 9 bits). Folks who depend on > integral types having exactly some size write less portable code than folks > who depend on said types having at least some size. > Marty Shannon > UUCP: ihnp4!attunix!mjs What? Aren't all machines just like my VAX? :~) -- ## Bill Stewart, AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ 1-201-949-0705 ihnp4!ho95c!wcs