Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: VMS
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 18:20:31 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 35
Message-ID: <103mndf$57lc$1@dont-email.me>
References: <wCqdnYde9MIbmND1nZ2dnZfqnPadnZ2d@giganews.com>
	<87tt4i9nw5.fsf@eder.anydns.info> <102l0h9$fjtb$5@dont-email.me>
	<Z2udned3u9ZgqtP1nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com>
	<slrn1054j9c.3ce8.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
	<PpudnVnCnvuYxc_1nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com>
	<wwva564xjps.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>
	<4_GdncCsf-Nqe8n1nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com>
	<wwv5xgqkfl9.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk> <103392c$lpbg$5@dont-email.me>
	<1033o4a$1qj6$3@dont-email.me> <1033tv1$3aqu$3@dont-email.me>
	<1034pj8$a74s$1@dont-email.me> <mbmm2nFdsgcU2@mid.individual.net>
	<slrn105cajs.4vj.spamtrap42@one.localnet>
	<slrn105g20l.3q8n7.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
	<slrn105k75h.h13.spamtrap42@one.localnet>
	<slrn105sci1.1ibsg.candycanearter07@candydeb.host.invalid>
	<wwv4iw1bpor.fsf@LkoBDZeT.terraraq.uk>
	<fPmcnaKaU81_TsP1nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com>
	<mc83bhFcp3sU1@mid.individual.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 20:20:31 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f3d45a10181959f35276219338617be3";
	logging-data="171692"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+1uXfQ1CgE72cn3UObF1srXdSuNXeFD6g="
User-Agent: Pan/0.139 (Sexual Chocolate; GIT bf56508
 git://git.gnome.org/pan2)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Ixzmxy460WvLN3xerzMVeFrIZNI=

On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 17:40:02 +0000, rbowman wrote:

> On Fri, 27 Jun 2025 13:24:06 -0400, c186282 wrote:
> 
>>   Some of us are old enough to remember when CPUs were
>>    not always 4/8/16/32/64 ... plus even now they've added a lot of new
>>    types like 128-bit ints. Simply ASSUMING an int is 16 bits is
>>    'usually safe' but not necessarily 'best practice' and limits future
>>    (or past) compatibility. 'C' lets you fly free ...
>>    but that CAN be straight into a window pane
> 
> Assuming an int is 16 bits is not a good idea. I wouldn't even assume a 
> short is 16 bits

It would depend on the programming language you use, it's conformance to
standards, and which standard it conforms to.

The ISO C standards, for instance, dictate that
- a char is at least 8 bits wide,
- an unsigned short int must be able to, at least, express values
  between 0 and 65535, and
- an unsigned int must be able to, at least, express values between 0 and
  65535

These last two imply that both unsigned short int and int are at least
16 bits wide. At least, according to the standard.

Now, you /can/ have a C compiler that DOES NOT comply, PARTIALLY complies,
or complies (WHEN REQUESTED) to the ISO C standard; for those compilers,
"you pay your money, and you take your chances"

HTH
-- 
Lew Pitcher
"In Skills We Trust"