[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: int vs. long in test(1)
On Jun 20, 2008, at 3:22 AM, Alan Barrett wrote:
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008, James Chacon wrote:
sh(1)'s test (-current/amd64) doesn't deal with big numbers (>
I think it would make sense to use intmax_t. We already do that for
the integers in shell arithmatic with the $((...)) syntax.
Isn't that wrong then for 64bit machines where int is 32 and the
"signed long" is what should be used here?
I don't see anything in the spec about integer sizes. I am looking at
intmax_t, being the largest signed integer type supported by the
compiler, is guaranteed to be at least as large as "signed long", and
may be larger. Where do you see a spec that requires "signed long"
forbids anything larger than that?
Never said it forbid anything larger. I just got confused about
intmax_t was all.
Main Index |
Thread Index |