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