Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
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: Sat, 04 Jan 2020 19:43:03 -0800
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <87tv5amuuw.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References: <qup223$eje$1@dont-email.me> <qup3ng$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>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="3df0afa7555d1392522deca6fbd13008"; logging-data="32298"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+1B41K0Hkf258f02+1g3xa"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Npvfha+stO5h+LCfwmYVw9MgJyI= sha1:7FwEcvnaXq5aeQGIPCEVfO5qrvw=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:71128

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 */