Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #71128
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? |
| Date | 2020-01-04 19:43 -0800 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <87tv5amuuw.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <qup3ng$krp$1@dont-email.me> <87k167odry.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <quq8k3$4he$1@dont-email.me> <8736cuon1x.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <quri9q$gtd$2@dont-email.me> |
James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
> On 1/4/20 5:48 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
[...]
>> You're right. N4567 3.9.1 [basic.fundamental] paragraph 3 says:
>>
>> The signed and unsigned integer types shall satisfy the constraints
>> given in the C standard, section 5.2.4.2.1.
>>
>> My earlier post was based on N4842, which is a working draft for C++20
>> (and happens to be the document that I had open at the time). In that
>> draft, 6.8.1 [basic.fundamental] paragraph 3 includes a table showing
>> the minimum widths of the 5 signed integer types:
>>
>> Type Minimum width N
>> signed char 8
>> short 16
>> int 16
>> long 32
>> long long 64
>>
>> The widths are sufficient to specify the ranges, since unlike the
>> current edition of the C++ standard, N4842 mandates 2's-complement
>> for signed integers, including the extra negative value:
[snip]
> It hadn't occurred to me that this might be something they were planning
> to change. I wonder if they're planning to change any other features
> from "incorporate by reference" to "copy wording with modifications"?
I don't know. In this particular case the C++ requirements are
diverging from the C requirements.
--
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 */
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? wolfgang bauer <schutz@gmx.de> - 2020-01-04 04:50 +0100
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-01-03 23:18 -0500
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? wolfgang bauer <schutz@gmx.de> - 2020-01-04 05:36 +0100
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2020-01-04 00:19 -0600
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@delq.com> - 2020-01-03 22:29 -0800
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-01-03 23:56 -0800
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-01-04 09:48 -0500
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-01-04 14:48 -0800
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-01-04 21:39 -0500
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-01-04 19:43 -0800
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2020-01-05 06:09 +0100
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-01-05 20:50 -0500
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-01-04 08:37 +0000
Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-01-04 02:16 -0800
Thank you. (was:Re: uint32_t is not the same as long unsigned int ?) wolfgang bauer <schutz@gmx.de> - 2020-01-04 15:15 +0100
csiph-web