Path: csiph.com!news.swapon.de!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: Don't be fooled by cpp.sh Date: Mon, 16 Dec 2019 10:47:41 -0800 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 21 Message-ID: <875zigw1iq.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> References: <356f42b0-2919-4e72-a1a2-3813212973f1@googlegroups.com> <7f5255fa-f634-4dc7-9f33-409acc47356c@googlegroups.com> <2a6b4b2d-283f-4b5f-9f4c-025efaa087a8@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="af3eef2bfca71f3ed9807aa66d779ff4"; logging-data="9321"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/r+7Ymv8tCfTKrs15oNXL3" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:ewqfoT62xVg0P80hcqWkTyfPCPc= sha1:lm5RkwBkzX6YZTdnNNMvuHL+ugA= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:70511 Robert Wessel writes: [...] > Personally I think both 128-bit types and arbitrary precision > arithmetic should be part of the language (whether in the language > proper or the library). 128-bit integer types are already permitted by the C++ standard. But adding a standard (extended or not) 128-bit integer type would conflict with existing ABIs and libraries due to the effect on [u]intmax_t. I don't think making 128-bit integers mandatory would be practical, given the difficulty (and questionable usefulness) of providing them on small embedded systems. Note that gcc supports __int128, but not on all targets. -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com [Note updated email address] Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */