Date: Tue, 23 May 2000 09:31:36 -0400
Message-Id: <200005231331.JAA21521@envy.delorie.com>
From: DJ Delorie <dj AT delorie DOT com>
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to: <86pbt1xbsq0.fsf@sirppi.helsinki.fi> (message from Esa A E Peuha
	on 23 May 2000 11:01:27 +0300)
Subject: Re: C++, complex, etc
References: <0rneisomj48fm3khdpdodsilqpndjqd7do AT 4ax DOT com> <Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000522093304 DOT 22890H-100000 AT is> <1osjis87hetlomjooiv6prc0iev46cncdt AT 4ax DOT com> <200005230314 DOT XAA01009 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> <86pbt1xbsq0 DOT fsf AT sirppi DOT helsinki DOT fi>
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


> > Imaging ssize_t being 8 bits.  Values are 0..255.
> 
> Since ssize_t is signed, the values should be -128..127.

It doesn't matter for my example; the range of differences is still
the same.

> BTW, why is djgpp's size_t typedef'd as long unsigned int while
> ssize_t is just int?

I don't remember.  It's possible there isn't a good reason.