On Tue, Aug 03, 2010 at 10:37:26AM -0700, Joshua Juran wrote: > >>Does any system exist where long long is not 64 bits? In any case, > >>you can future-proof it by spelling it "int64_t". That symbol is not > >>guaranteed to exist (nor is <stdint.h>), but neither is the long long > >>type in the first place. > > > >C99 specifies that "short" and "int" be at least 16 bits, that > >"long" be > >at least 32 bits, and that "long long" be at least 64 bits. See > >section > >5.2.4.2.1. > > Right, but there's no guarantee that long long won't be *larger* than > 64 bits. Though maybe that wouldn't be a problem. Ah, I took your statement to mean "at least". In this case, I don't think it would be a problem (we could just represent more times). -Peff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html