lots deleted
>
> And it would be terrible to do as the C committee has done and say in
> one release of the standard that "long" is the longest integer type,
> only in the next version to say, 'No, we didn't mean it; too many
> people have made the assumption that "long" means 32-bit; "long long"
> is a new integer type longer than "long" -- breaking what code was
> carefully crafted to rely upon the standard, but to be size-independent.
>
thanks for raising this, i've been keeping an eye on c9x and presume
that your above statement refers to this standard.
this seems to imply incompatability with c++ as the copy of the
standard i have mentions int, long int and unsigned long int.
>
> Carlie J. Coats, Jr. [log in to unmask]
> MCNC Environmental Programs phone: (919)248-9241
> North Carolina Supercomputing Center fax: (919)248-9245
> 3021 Cornwallis Road P. O. Box 12889
> Research Triangle Park, N. C. 27709-2889 USA
> "My opinions are my own, and I've got *lots* of them!"
--
Ian
[log in to unmask]
Home page
http://www.kcl.ac.uk/kis/support/cit//fortran/
comp-fortran-90 home page
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/comp-fortran-90.html
|