| To: | "Albert D. Cahalan" <yyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: BUG in XBDd5 (preserve integral types) |
| From: | Ulrich Drepper <yyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | 10 Jan 2001 15:29:28 -0800 |
| Cc: | yyy@xxxxxxxxxxx (Geoff Clare), yyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, yyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| References: | <200101102300.f0AN0ZK416368@saturn.cs.uml.edu> |
"Albert D. Cahalan" <yyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > This is just bad: 8 16 32 128 > > See a problem? Nobody is going to give up having a 64-bit type. > Larger char, short, and int types would be a disaster. There > will be a 128-bit "long long long" type. What are you talking about? 8 = char, 16 = short, 32 = int, 64 = long, 128 = long long. This is the same transition (with long in place of int) done for 64 bit platforms. For 256bit platforms there will be a problem. -- ---------------. ,-. 1325 Chesapeake Terrace Ulrich Drepper \ ,-------------------' \ Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `------------------------ |
| Previous by Date: | Re: BUG in XBDd5 (preserve integral types), Ulrich Drepper |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: BUG in XBDd5 (preserve integral types), Ulrich Drepper |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: BUG in XBDd5 (preserve integral types), Albert D. Cahalan |
| Next by Thread: | Re: BUG in XBDd5 (preserve integral types), Paul Eggert |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [All Lists] |