jgp@moscom.UUCP (03/30/87)
[This doesn't have much to do with emacs so I'm directing followup to lang.c] In article <1318@steinmetz.steinmetz.UUCP> davidsen@kbsvax.steinmetz.UUCP (William E. Davidsen Jr) writes: %In article <812@nrcvax.UUCP> ihm@minnie.UUCP (Ian Merritt) writes: %%al@seismo.CSS.GOV@siac.UUCP writes: %%% the problem stems largely from the fact that an int %%% is not the same size as a (char *). %... %%... or '186 or 8086. It wouldn't be such a crime to refuse to support %%silly little toy architectures, except for the fact that there are % ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ % and PDP-11?? Both (char *) and (int) are 16 bits on our (and I assume most) pdp11's. %If you want to put the heat in the right place, how about the %fact that all 80x86 C compilers allow 32 bit integers (long) and %no one has given the option to make the default size of int 32 bits. Such an option would be great for 680[01]0's too. In the name of portability everyone makes int's 32 bits even though the 020 was the first 68k to be able to multiply 32 bit quanitities in a timely fasion. Does GnuC offer the ability to select the size of an int? 16 bit ints and 32 bit pointers mean that some standard unix calls need to take longs instead of ints (malloc, strncpy etc.) but the implicit casting of parameters possible in ANSI C could make this painless enough to consider. -- Jim Prescott rochester!moscom!jgp