Re: [Pan-users] Re: GigaNews warns "Usenet Growth Reveals Need for 64-bit Based Article Numbering"

[CSV4ME2]

On Monday 25 August 2008, Duncan wrote:
> Beso <address@hidden> posted
> address@hidden, excerpted
>
> below, on  Mon, 25 Aug 2008 16:06:13 +0200:
> > this might mean quite a big trouble with klibido too...
>
> Indeed... and probably thunderbird and claws and knode and... and...
>
> BTW, "long" is 32-bit on x86_64 too, right?  Or is it 64-bit?  I know the
> addresses are 64-bit, but if I'm not mistaken, one of the porting issues
> was that a lot of software expected memory addresses to be unsigned long
> and on 64-bit, they're not, but rather unsigned long long, or /something/
> like that.  Did I get it right?  And plain int, is that 16-bit, or 32?

run this litle c file thru your compiler, gcc -o size size.c
and you will know!

C

============


#include <stdio.h>

#define P(x) printf( "%20s = %2d bits\n", #x, sizeof(x)*8 );

int main( int argc, char **argv )
{ 
        P( char ); 
        P( unsigned char ); 
        P( int  ); 
        P( unsigned int ); 
        P( short        ); 
        P( unsigned short ); 
        P( long ); 
        P( unsigned long ); 
        P( long long    ); 
        P( unsigned long long ); 
        P( float        ); 
        P( double       ); 
        P( long double  ); 
        return 0;
}

size.c
Description: Text Data

Makefile
Description: Text Data