Re: Q: void* vs. unsigned long
H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
16 Feb 1999 12:36:27 GMT
Followup to: <m10Cjto-0007U1C@the-village.bc.nu>
By author: alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk (Alan Cox)
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> > Interesting, so this tells that:
> >
> > rank(long long int) > rank(long int) > rank(int) > rank(short int) > rank(char)
> >
> > While following was the previous definition:
> >
> > rank(long long int) >= rank(long int) >= rank(int) >= rank(short int) >= rank(char)
>
> If that definition has been changed the C9X committee are broken. On X86
> for example short=long in size. Anyone who expects all the compilers to
> change their object sizes is to say the least misguided
>
That's not what it says. The original poster confused rank (promotion
order) with size.
-hpa
--
"Linux is a very complete and sophisticated operating system. There
are, and will be, large numbers of applications available for it."
-- Paul Maritz, Group Vice President for Platforms And Applications,
Microsoft Corporation [Reference at: http://www.kernel.org/~hpa/ms.html]
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/