Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register

Groups > comp.lang.c > #393127

Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?)

Show key headers only | View raw

Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:

> On 25/03/2025 11:55, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>
>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 25.03.2025 05:56, Tim Rentsch wrote:
>>>
>>>> Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>>> When I started with "C" or C++ there were not only 8-bit
>>>>> multiples defined for the integral types;  [...]
>>>>
>>>> In C the correct phrase is integer types, not integral types.
>>>
>>> My apologies if I'm using language independent terms.
>>
>> The problem is that what was written used the word "integral"
>> incorrectly.
>
> But "integer type" is also a problem.  'Integer' is a noun, not an
> adjective.  To modify the noun 'type' you need an adjective that means
> of, pertaining to, or being an integer'.  The only available candidate
> is 'integral'.

Using a noun as a modifier to another noun is a perfectly normal
English construction.  It's called a noun adjunct.  "Chicken soup"
is an example.  See

    https://en.wikipedia.org/Noun_adjunct

Furthermore, there are other noun-as-modifier constructions in the
original C standard.  The C89/C90 standard has "function types",
"character types", "signed integer types", "unsigned integer
types", "integer constants", and "integer character constants", to
give a few examples.  In fact the C standard is rife with noun-noun
phrases:  "execution environment", "storage boundaries", "byte
address", "bit representation", "language elements", "program
construct", "character set" -- and that's just on page 2.

> I'll cheerfully accept "integer type" because, though clumsy, it's
> standardese.  But if we're using English it's wrong to reject "integral
> type"; 'adjective noun' is far closer to the spirit of the English
> language than 'noun noun'.

Both are perfectly fine, as far as what kind of constructions are
allowed in English.  The reason "integral types" is a worse choice
than "integer types" is that "integral types" has a different
meaning, and in particular an inappropriate meaning.  The adjective
"integral" refers to the /value/ of a number, regardless of what
number system it is in.  The noun "integer" used as a modifier refers
to the number system.  An integer number always has an integral
value, but real numbers or complex numbers can have integral values
without being integer numbers.

> At least until such time as the backroom
> boffins come up with a better adjective for 'of, pertaining to, or
> being an integer', I stand with a foot planted firmly within each
> camp.

One word being an adjective is a red herring.  Using "integer types"
is better both because it is more consistent with other parts of the
C standard and because the meaning is crisper due to there being
less ambiguity as to what is meant.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-03 20:03 -0700
  Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-04 14:04 +0200
    Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-05-04 15:43 +0100
      Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-04 18:39 +0200
        Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-05-04 19:02 +0100
          Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2025-05-05 11:29 +0200
      Re: Integral types and own type definitions (was Re: Suggested method for returning a string from a C program?) Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2025-05-15 23:02 -0700

csiph-web