Path: csiph.com!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: spud@potato.field
Newsgroups: comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: Odd compiler behaviour?
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 13:38:25 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
Lines: 11
Message-ID: <ndgksh$1ech$1@gioia.aioe.org>
References: <nb3t47$19o6$1@gioia.aioe.org> <nbmt79$127e$1@gioia.aioe.org> <dltpmgFhjrsU5@mid.individual.net> <nddeio$1vif$1@gioia.aioe.org> <kkvKy.64376$bB1.22081@fx30.iad> <nde27h$1367$1@gioia.aioe.org> <87a8lhib40.fsf@doppelsaurus.mobileactivedefense.com> <nde611$1adl$1@gioia.aioe.org> <b4yKy.84823$LP.9185@fx16.iad> <ndg2df$ekq$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ijQKy.110871$X_.33591@fx04.iad>
NNTP-Posting-Host: IkJkuvU+mf0C8Ve1AyJG/g.user.gioia.aioe.org
X-Complaints-To: abuse@aioe.org
X-Newsreader: :redaersweN-X
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
Xref: csiph.com comp.unix.programmer:8277

On Wed, 30 Mar 2016 13:14:54 GMT
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:
>lock level number (range 0 to 9999) was higher than any prior locks

Was 9999 an arbitrary "seems large enough" value, or was it stored as 2 byte
BCD?

--
Spud