Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: VMS
Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 09:08:19 -0700
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <20250630090819.00002b4c@gmail.com>
References: <wCqdnYde9MIbmND1nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com> <wwv5xgqkfl9.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <103392c$lpbg$5@dont-email.me> <1033o4a$1qj6$3@dont-email.me> <1033tv1$3aqu$3@dont-email.me> <1034pj8$a74s$1@dont-email.me> <mbmm2nFdsgcU2@mid.individual.net> <slrn105cajs.4vj.spamtrap42@one.localnet> <slrn105g20l.3q8n7.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid> <slrn105k75h.h13.spamtrap42@one.localnet> <slrn105sci1.1ibsg.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid> <wwv4iw1bpor.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <fPmcnaKaU81_TsP1nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> <mc83bhFcp3sU1@mid.individual.net> <vAmdnSM-9LvohcL1nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> <wwva55sfgln.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <TqicnUo8-prXLf31nZ2dnZfqnPGdnZ2d@giganews.com> <wwvplenj9sn.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <cs6dnYG6Hbc5Wvz1nZ2dnZfqn_idnZ2d@giganews.com> <103teq1$220b9$1@dont-email.me> <wwvv7odu0p2.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <103tg4t$220b9$3@dont-email.me> <103ti51$22ifd$7@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Mon, 30 Jun 2025 18:08:24 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="d92670c28d82e01637d6a6b34a0235d5"; logging-data="2264051"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19l7b8VyMAUj3KZ/GVIwxDkhDP5oYo/sSo="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:IXTivCZnCLBVa3P3Idjzh3Rpd8w=
X-Newsreader: Claws Mail 4.3.0 (GTK 3.24.42; x86_64-w64-mingw32)
Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:69220

On Mon, 30 Jun 2025 08:33:37 -0000 (UTC)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> wrote:

> Remember, Unix systems were fully 32-bit right from the 1980s
> onwards, and embraced 64-bit early on with the DEC Alpha in 1992. So
> =E2=80=9Clong=E2=80=9D would have been 64 bits from at least that time, b=
ecause why
> waste an occurrence of the =E2=80=9Clong=E2=80=9D qualifier?

Entirely dependent on the particular flavor and implementation. I once
had to modify a benchmark when running it on VAX NetBSD (7, I think...?)
due to assumptions about sizeof(int) vs. sizeof(long) getting violated -
which, I imagine, had their roots in compatibility with earlier Unices.