RE: Is 'long unsigned long' compliant to standard?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



long and unsigned are type-specifiers. They are accepted in a looping syntax
such as declaration-specifiers (see the C grammar). Specifying long twice is
simply redundant, and has no effect on the final type. 

-----Original Message-----
From: gcc-help-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gcc-help-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Zuxy Meng
Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 5:25 AM
To: gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Is 'long unsigned long' compliant to standard?

Hi Gurus,

GCC accepts it without any warning, but could anybody confirm it's guaranteed to work on any compliant compiler?

--
Zuxy

---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.762 / Virus Database: 510 - Release Date: 9/13/2004
 

---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.762 / Virus Database: 510 - Release Date: 9/13/2004
 


[Index of Archives]     [Linux C Programming]     [Linux Kernel]     [eCos]     [Fedora Development]     [Fedora Announce]     [Autoconf]     [The DWARVES Debugging Tools]     [Yosemite Campsites]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux GCC]

  Powered by Linux