From: Radical NetSurfer Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: printf, cprintf and CR/LF problem Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 00:23:54 -0400 Message-ID: References: <39a8d2ed DOT 6649049 AT news DOT freeserve DOT net> X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 1.8/32.548 X-No-Archive: yes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.202.134.140 X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 216.202.134.140 X-Trace: 28 Aug 2000 00:26:53 -0400, 216.202.134.140 Lines: 33 X-Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 64.31.79.51 To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Interesting... I'm keeping this handy for future reference :-) On Sun, 27 Aug 2000 08:35:59 GMT, dontmailme AT iname DOT com (Steamer) wrote: >Radical NetSurfer wrote: > >> /* Still waiting to learn what a 16-bit entity is called on a 32-bit >> platform (since WORD has been made in an ambiguous term. */ > >There has never been a standard word size, so "word" has always been >ambiguous. On a particular platform it ought to be obvious what "word" >means, but 386-compatible processors running in 32-bit mode represent >a problem - their native word size is 32 bits, but they are derived >from 16-bit processors where "word" has always meant 16 bits. > >What's wrong with calling a 16-bit entity "two bytes"? (Or "two octets", >if you want to be totally unambiguous.) The term "short" is OK too, as >long as you only use it when talking about compilers on which a short is >16 bits (which includes all x86 C compilers that I've ever seen). > >Or you may like to use the terminology that Donald Knuth has adopted >for future volumes of The Art of Computer Programming: > > 1 byte = 8 bits > 2 bytes = 1 wyde = 16 bits > 2 wydes = 1 tetra = 32 bits > 2 tetras = 1 octa = 64 bits > >The words "tetra" and "octa" are short forms of "tetrabyte" and "octabyte". > >S.