No, you have me there. However, (to the original question), the order of appearance of the items should not matter. -----Original Message----- From: Tom St Denis [mailto:tstdenis@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] Sent: Tuesday, January 22, 2008 11:26 AM To: Scott Moore Cc: Zuxy Meng; gcc-help@xxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Re: Is 'long unsigned long' compliant to standard? Scott Moore wrote: > 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. > you mean "unsigned long" and "unsigned long long" are the same? Or you mean that "long unsigned long " and "unsigned long" are the same? Tom --- 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
