In article <3B6FF732.E94C5F53@aicoss.de> , Markus Becker <bec### [at] aicossde>
wrote:

> What is common agreement?

You did check out the link, didn't you?  For an "official" summary you may
want to read <http://www.opengroup.org/public/tech/aspen/aspenf.htm>.  To me
this sounds like a common agreement, doesn't it?

> That my ints are 32 bit _and_ my longs
> are 32 bit (and I guess so are yours). I still have to see an
> implementation (on common machines, i.e. Linux/Windows/Apple,...)
> that has 64 bit longs (apart from __int64 and the like).

I was talking about 64 bit architectures!

> If the machine architecture is 64 bits, then integers will be
> exactly that (and stay equal in size to longs, as they are
> on todays 32 bit platforms).

Nope.  It will be 32 bit for int and 64 bit for long on all professional
Unix versions by default (of course taking into account backward
compatibility issues).  I think (from the link I cited) DEC/Compaq, HP, IBM,
Intel, Novell, NCR, and Sun are sufficient to call it common (together at
least 99% market share of 64 bit workstations and servers)...


    Thorsten

____________________________________________________
Thorsten Froehlich, Duisburg, Germany
e-mail: tho### [at] trfde

Visit POV-Ray on the web: http://mac.povray.org

Post a reply to this message