Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #171911
| From | Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Hierarchy among minimum-width types (and also among fastest minimum-width types) |
| Date | 2023-08-09 00:02 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <86pm3waeb1.fsf@linuxsc.com> (permalink) |
| References | <f0889fe7-1103-4ef4-aa36-b0f39562e364n@googlegroups.com> |
arnab chatterjee <arnabchatterjeeofficial@gmail.com> writes: > Does the specification of minimum-width integer types (in > <stdint.h>) assure the expected integer rank hierarchy among them? No. > For example in a hypothetical system where there is no 32-bit wide > type (nor any basic type having width in the range [32, 63]) and > both int and long are 64-bit wide, is it possible for a conforming > implementation to define int_least32_t as long and int_least64_t as > int, thereby implying that int_least32_t has a higher rank than > int_least64_t? Yes, assuming what you mean by "basic types" is the standard integer types, and that this condition also applies to extended integer types. All of the types in <stdint.h> are allowed to be extended integer types. > Same question also applies for hierarchy among the fastest > minimum-width types. Continuing with the earlier example (and > further assuming that both int and long are equally fast), is it > possible for a conforming implementation to define int_fast32_t as > long and int_fast64_t as int (inverting the expected hierarchy)? Same answer as above.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Hierarchy among minimum-width types (and also among fastest minimum-width types) arnab chatterjee <arnabchatterjeeofficial@gmail.com> - 2023-08-08 23:30 -0700
Re: Hierarchy among minimum-width types (and also among fastest minimum-width types) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2023-08-09 00:02 -0700
Re: Hierarchy among minimum-width types (and also among fastest minimum-width types) arnab chatterjee <arnabchatterjeeofficial@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 01:00 -0700
Re: Hierarchy among minimum-width types (and also among fastest minimum-width types) Kaz Kylheku <864-117-4973@kylheku.com> - 2023-08-09 15:18 +0000
Re: Hierarchy among minimum-width types (and also among fastest minimum-width types) arnab chatterjee <arnabchatterjeeofficial@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 22:00 -0700
Re: Hierarchy among minimum-width types (and also among fastest minimum-width types) arnab chatterjee <arnabchatterjeeofficial@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 22:38 -0700
Re: Hierarchy among minimum-width types (and also among fastest minimum-width types) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2023-08-12 11:53 -0700
Re: Hierarchy among minimum-width types (and also among fastest minimum-width types) arnab chatterjee <arnabchatterjeeofficial@gmail.com> - 2023-08-09 01:04 -0700
csiph-web