Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!husc6!cmcl2!rutgers!topaz.rutgers.edu!ron
From: ron@topaz.rutgers.edu (Ron Natalie)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: pointer alignment when int != char *
Message-ID: <13298@topaz.rutgers.edu>
Date: Mon, 13-Jul-87 15:25:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: topaz.13298
Posted: Mon Jul 13 15:25:14 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 15-Jul-87 02:08:34 EDT
References: <493@its63b.ed.ac.uk> <6061@brl-smoke.ARPA> <3812@spool.WISC.EDU> <13218@topaz.rutgers.edu> <6655@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP>
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Lines: 16
Xref: mnetor comp.lang.c:3032 comp.unix.wizards:3236

> : When we did the compilers for the HEP Supercomputer (64 bit words),
> : we opted for 16 bit shorts, 64 bit ints,  and 64 bit longs.  There is
> : one more hardware supported type (half words-32 bits).  Avoiding things...

> Why not have int be 32 bits? That fits the requirement that
> length char<=short<=int<=long. Not a comment, just a question...

Because "int" is supposed to be a convenient size.  The convenient size for
us is 64 bits.  Since the largest number of variables are type "int" you
want to use something pretty efficient (like the word size).

By they way, you assumption that type "char" has some guaranteed relationship
to any of the integer types is wrong, although anyone who has "char"s that
aren't exactly eight bits is likely to cause many applications to die.

-Ron