Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!nntp.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: _BitInt(N) Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 05:35:30 -0800 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 24 Message-ID: <87tsyj3659.fsf@example.invalid> References: <10dajlh$ko3c$1@dont-email.me> <10fus62$hl69$1@solani.org> <10fv2dm$3can9$1@paganini.bofh.team> <10fv40v$1f7a2$1@dont-email.me> <10g0k70$22deu$1@dont-email.me> <10g1gge$2b2cf$2@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Date: Mon, 24 Nov 2025 13:35:31 +0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="497198ffef236bf75350d11e6379045b"; logging-data="2535543"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/t9SmRtNxQchHzplBaq/Oh" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cancel-Lock: sha1:s91OGHswmXxRmVq1kcylq3Tb9vQ= sha1:MnmDiZn1YLaSqwo92Q1ip/1+EsY= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:395416 bart writes: [...] > There are two kinds of BitInts: those smaller than 64 bits; and those > larger than 64 bits, sometimes /much/ larger. As far as I know, the standard makes no such distinction. > I had been responding to the claim that those smaller types save > memory, compared to using sizes 8/16/32 bits which are commonly > available and have better hardware support. I don't recall any such claim. Do you have a citation (other than the FPGA-specific wording in N2709)? > But if a _BitInt(17) is rounded up to 32 bits, there's not going to be > any saving! Correct. [...] -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */