Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #9712

Re: function

From Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com>
Subject Re: function
Date 2011-08-29 19:58 +0100
Message-Id <pan.2011.08.29.18.58.46.578000@nowhere.com>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
References (2 earlier) <4e4619ef$0$44201$4fafbaef@reader1.news.tin.it> <942c6e6d-c431-4be7-8e3c-6064a7a6264f@cf8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <4e5aa0bb$0$28095$bbae4d71@news.suddenlink.net> <296bb83d-2329-4c23-b70e-96114a879d38@t7g2000vbv.googlegroups.com> <fuCdncrkx4Db_sbTnZ2dnUVZ_vadnZ2d@posted.internetamerica>
Organization Zen Internet

Show all headers | View raw

On Mon, 29 Aug 2011 05:00:38 -0500, Gordon Burditt wrote:

> Use of 16-bit or 32-bit chars might also be appropriate if the native
> character set is Unicode.

Not really. The question isn't the size of a "character", but the size of
the smallest "unit" of data which you wish to handle, as you can't have
any object smaller than a "char".

Which tends to mean that 16/32-bit "char" is reserved for highly
specialised architectures which don't need to deal with file formats,
network protocols, etc.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

function "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-08-11 05:04 -0400
  Re: function Mark Bluemel <mark_bluemel@pobox.com> - 2011-08-11 11:36 +0100
    Re: function Ralph Spitzner <rasp@spitzner.org> - 2011-08-11 14:13 +0200
      Re: function Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-11 15:12 +0100
  Re: function "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-08-11 06:45 -0400
  Re: function John Gordon <gordon@panix.com> - 2011-08-11 14:03 +0000
  Re: function Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-08-11 07:14 -0700
    Re: function "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-08-11 17:16 -0400
    Re: function "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-08-13 08:32 +0200
      Re: function Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-08-15 04:08 -0700
        Re: function "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-08-28 04:11 -0400
          Re: function Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-08-29 00:03 -0700
            Re: function gordonb.kyfki@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2011-08-29 05:00 -0500
              Re: function Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-08-29 19:58 +0100
            Re: function "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-08-29 20:43 -0400
              Re: function Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-08-30 01:48 +0100
                Re: function "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-08-29 21:14 -0400
              Re: function "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-08-29 20:52 -0400
              Re: function Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-08-30 01:08 -0700
  Re: function "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2011-08-14 17:43 -0400

csiph-web