From: "Alexei A. Frounze" Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: size_t Date: Thu, 18 May 2000 21:58:06 +0400 Organization: MTU-Intel ISP Lines: 28 Message-ID: <39242F2E.826D81CE@mtu-net.ru> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: ppp104-235.dialup.mtu-net.ru Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: gavrilo.mtu.ru 958672935 87808 212.188.104.235 (18 May 2000 18:02:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet-abuse AT mtu DOT ru NNTP-Posting-Date: 18 May 2000 18:02:15 GMT X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; I) X-Accept-Language: ru,en To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > On Thu, 18 May 2000, Alexei A. Frounze wrote: > > > But does that mean we read books which teach us to > > make buggy programs? There usually used "int" and "long int" instead of > > "size_t" and "fpos_t". > > Yes, these books make you a disservice. Damn. I'll throw away those books. New slogan: Don't trust books anymore! :) Btw, are the things we're discussing (size_t, complex) described in modern C/C++ programming books? > (I assume you meant to say off_t, not fpos_t, because the latter is not > usually replaced with a long.) Dunno. I remember fpos_t from Borland C/C++. Borland's has not had off_t. I don't know if it has that type nowadays. -- Alexei A. Frounze ----------------------------------------- Homepage: http://alexfru.chat.ru Mirror: http://members.xoom.com/alexfru