Date: Thu, 13 May 1999 09:47:48 +0300 (EET DST)
From: Pasi Franti <franti AT cs DOT joensuu DOT fi>
To: Eugene Ageenko <ageson AT cs DOT joensuu DOT fi>
cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>, djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Portability and size_t type related question
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.4.10.9905121713580.9519-100000@cs.joensuu.fi>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.4.10.9905130944050.5527-100000@cs.joensuu.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


> Ok. thanx. it is like here then:
> 
> typedef  unsigned short    U16;
> typedef  unsigned long     U32;
> typedef  unsigned char     BYTE;

I disagree.

I did not follow your discussion but how did you come up to such
conclusion? You can never be sure of how many bits are int and 
long types without checking it! So what makes you think that 
unsigned long would be different case? As far as I know, it is
more likely to be U64 as we use 32-bit compilers where int is
32 bits and long 64 bits.

In fact, even char is not necessary 8 bits even though it is
so almost everywhere.

If you have some reasoning for this, please let me know.