tech-userlevel archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: int vs. long in test(1)

To: tech-userlevel%NetBSD.org@localhost
Subject: Re: int vs. long in test(1)
From: Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2008 21:22:09 +0200

On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 11:56:43AM -0700, James Chacon wrote:
> Isn't that wrong then for 64bit machines where int is 32 and the spec says 
> "signed long" is what should be used here?

The wording of the standard means that you can support more, but don't
have to. It is valid to use multi-precision math for example.

>
> James
>

Follow-Ups:
- Re: int vs. long in test(1)
  - From: James Chacon

References:
- int vs. long in test(1)
  - From: Thomas Klausner
- Re: int vs. long in test(1)
  - From: Alan Barrett
- Re: int vs. long in test(1)
  - From: James Chacon

Prev by Date: Re: int vs. long in test(1)
Next by Date: Re: bsdcpio and bsdtar installed by default
Previous by Thread: Re: int vs. long in test(1)
Next by Thread: Re: int vs. long in test(1)
Indexes:

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index