Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2003 10:14:28 +0100 From: Stefan Farfeleder <stefan@fafoe.narf.at> To: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> Cc: Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> Subject: Re: Anyone object to the following change in libc? Message-ID: <20031031091426.GB866@wombat.fafoe.narf.at> In-Reply-To: <20031031174658.T3463@gamplex.bde.org> References: <BAEB9CED-091F-11D8-B483-000393BB9222@queasyweasel.com> <3F9F4FE6.29C4E178@mindspring.com> <3FA0EEFD.431DD759@mindspring.com> <20031030120925.K80335@beagle.fokus.fraunhofer.de> <200310301659.h9UGxAPk023337@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu> <20031031174658.T3463@gamplex.bde.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Oct 31, 2003 at 06:01:34PM +1100, Bruce Evans wrote:
> POSIX requires in addition [u]int{8,16,32}_t, and [u]int64_t if 64 bit
> integer types exist. It says that the existence of int8_t implies
> that a byte is 8 bits and CHAR_BIT is 8. I'm not sure what prevents
> int8_t being smaller than char.
It follows from the fact int8_t isn't allowed to contain padding bits and
from 6.2.6.1 saying:
"Values stored in non-bit-field objects of any other object type consist of n ×
CHAR_BIT bits, where n is the size of an object of that type, in bytes."
Stefan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20031031091426.GB866>