473,326 Members | 2,805 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post Job

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 473,326 software developers and data experts.

ints ints ints and ints

Ok,

I am getting really sick of all these integers types. Not only in C... but
mostly in C.

WHY DOESN'T ANSI MAKE THESE TYPES A STANDARD

sint8
uint8

sint16
uin16

sint32
uint32

sint64
uint64

I am getting really really sick of

long long int...

blablabla

short int blablabla

That's BULLSHIT :D

Now at least microsoft has easy stuff:

__int8
__int16
__int32
__int64

etc..

THE SHITTY SHIT IS !!!:

That when I want to compile the same source code on linux/knoppix the
system/compiler starts bitching ofcourse that __int8 is unknown etc !

THAT S WHY I AM GETTING REALLY SICK OF IT :DDDDD

OFCOURSE I COULD JUST DOWNLOAD SOME SOURCE CODE SIGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

WITH FRICKING IFDEFS
#IFDEF WINDOWS THEN

__INT8 blablabla

#ENDIF

#IFDEF LINUX THEN

INT BLABLABLA
LOL

THEN I GET SICK OF IFDEFS

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
zzzz

ISN"T IT TIME FOR A FRICKING UPDATE LOL ? :)

By the way.. the same goes for DELPHI, JAVA, AND PROBABLY EVEN THE NEW C#
not to forget crappy good old C++ ? :)

ANYWAY

I have no problems with people wanting a general integer types... Like int
in c or integer in delphi representing the best or most whatever kind of
thing that matches the computer architecture.

That's a good question !

Why is int in C or integer in Pascal...

16 bit for 16 bit systems
32 bit for 32 bit systems
64 bit for 64 bit systems

THAT CAN ONLY LEAD TO PROBLEMS !

The answer is probably SPEED.

I THINK MOST PROGRAMMERS WILL AGREE WITH THIS STATEMENT:

CORRECTNESS VS SPEED

CORRECTNESS PREFAILS !

MAYBE C programmers DISAGREE WITH THAT ?

THAT WOULD BE FUNNY.

ANYWAY since I mentioned DELPHI as WELL.

I RATHER SEE C AND DELPHI/PASCAL PROGRAMS FUNCTION AND COMPILE CORRECTLY ON
WHATEVER THE ARCHITECTURE IS !

THE ONLY WAY TO MAKE SURE IS TO USE INT8, INT16, INT32 etc etc etc.

THEN LATER !!!!! THE CODE CAN BE OPTIMIZED FOR 64 BIT SYSTEMS ?!? RIGHT ?!?!

BESIDES FROM THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER TO HAVE 16 BIT, 32 BIT and 64 BIT
versions of exactly the same source code... but a little bit
different.... at least that's what I do for little routines... :)

CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN WHY THE INTEGER TYPES IN C AND DELPHI ARE SO FUCKED IP
?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

GOD DAMN IT =D

Bye,
Skybuck.











Nov 14 '05 #1
24 2068
"Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:cc**********@news3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl:
Ok,

I am getting really sick of all these integers types. Not only in C...
but mostly in C.

WHY DOESN'T ANSI MAKE THESE TYPES A STANDARD

sint8
uint8

sint16
uin16

sint32
uint32

sint64
uint64

I am getting really really sick of

long long int...


They did in C99 (the names are slightly different). Barring a C99
compiler, you should have long ago created a myBaseTypes.h file and placed
these typedefs in it. Then, for eache compiler you work with, just include
myBaseTypes.h and be done with it. You only need to put checks like this
into the header file and then you'll be sure that you get the bit widths
you expect (if they are possible):

/*----------------------------------------------------------------
** TYPE S32
**----------------------------------------------------------------
*/
#define INT_32_MAX (0x7FFFFFFF)
#define INT_32_MIN (0xFFFFFFFF)

#if (SCHAR_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef signed char S32;
#elif (SHRT_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef short int S32;
#elif (INT_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef int S32;
#elif (LONG_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef long S32;
#else
# error "Cannot define type S32."
#endif
Nov 14 '05 #2

"Mark A. Odell" <od*******@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:Xn********************************@130.133.1. 4...
"Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:cc**********@news3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl:
Ok,

I am getting really sick of all these integers types. Not only in C...
but mostly in C.

WHY DOESN'T ANSI MAKE THESE TYPES A STANDARD

sint8
uint8

sint16
uin16

sint32
uint32

sint64
uint64

I am getting really really sick of

long long int...


They did in C99 (the names are slightly different). Barring a C99
compiler, you should have long ago created a myBaseTypes.h file and placed
these typedefs in it. Then, for eache compiler you work with, just include
myBaseTypes.h and be done with it. You only need to put checks like this
into the header file and then you'll be sure that you get the bit widths
you expect (if they are possible):

/*----------------------------------------------------------------
** TYPE S32
**----------------------------------------------------------------
*/
#define INT_32_MAX (0x7FFFFFFF)
#define INT_32_MIN (0xFFFFFFFF)

#if (SCHAR_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef signed char S32;
#elif (SHRT_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef short int S32;
#elif (INT_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef int S32;
#elif (LONG_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef long S32;
#else
# error "Cannot define type S32."
#endif

HUH ??????????????????????

I DONT WANT ANY IFDEFS !

I WANT A COMPILER THAT CAN UNDERSTAND

SINT32
UINT32

Or something like that...

So that everybody on the planet can easily write:

sint32 main()
{
sint32 a;
uint8 b;
sint8 c;

a = 12345; // isn't life wonderfull

b = 255; // look at me I just fit !!! :P

c = 128; // oops ? is signed int max 127 or 128 ? hmmm
c = -128; // <-- hmm never seen that so I am pretty sure sint8 is -127
to 128 =DDD yess

return 0;
}

Bye,
Skybuck.
Nov 14 '05 #3
Skybuck Flying wrote:
CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN WHY THE INTEGER TYPES IN C AND DELPHI ARE SO FUCKED IP
?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!


I think thats enough coffee for you today.

--
Eric Enright /"\
ericAtiptsoftDcom \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML E-Mail
Public Key: 0xBEDF636F / \
Nov 14 '05 #4
"Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> writes:
Ok,

I am getting really sick of all these integers types. Not only in C... but
mostly in C.

WHY DOESN'T ANSI MAKE THESE TYPES A STANDARD

sint8
uint8 [...] That's BULLSHIT :D [...] THAT S WHY I AM GETTING REALLY SICK OF IT :DDDDD

[...]

As it happens, there's a perfectly reasonable answer to your question.
Ask it again, without shouting and swearing at us, and I'll tell you
what it is.

I don't necessarily object to "dirty" words as such, and I can even
sympathize with your frustration, but a little politeness goes a long
way. This isn't alt.flame.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Nov 14 '05 #5
Skybuck Flying <no****@hotmail.com> wrote:
sint8 c;
c = 128; // oops ? is signed int max 127 or 128 ? hmmm
c = -128; // <-- hmm never seen that so I am pretty sure sint8 is -127
to 128 =DDD yess


Live isn't that simple: assuming that sint8 is meant to be a signed
8 bit wide integer type, for a two-complements machine the values it
can store range from -128 to + 127, while on a one-complements
machine only from -127 to +127...
Regards, Jens
--
\ Jens Thoms Toerring ___ Je***********@physik.fu-berlin.de
\__________________________ http://www.toerring.de
Nov 14 '05 #6
In 'comp.lang.c', "Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> wrote:
I am getting really sick of all these integers types. Not only in C...
but mostly in C.

WHY DOESN'T ANSI MAKE THESE TYPES A STANDARD

sint8
uint8

sint16
uin16

sint32
uint32

sint64
uint64


Get a C99 compiler.

But keep in mind that on some machines (DSP, for example), a byte is wider
that 8 bits! Sorry if you feel sick again..

I use my own typedefs

http://mapage.noos.fr/emdel/clib/ed/inc/TYPES.H

and is fine to me. Just keep in mind the minimum requested values for each
type, and don't go furher, even if the implementation allows it.

For example :
uchar : 0..0xFF
uint/ushort : 0..0xFFFF
ulong : 0..0xFFFFFFFF

simple as that.

--
-ed- get my email here: http://marreduspam.com/ad672570
The C-language FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
C-reference: http://www.dinkumware.com/manuals/reader.aspx?lib=c99
FAQ de f.c.l.c : http://www.isty-info.uvsq.fr/~rumeau/fclc/
Nov 14 '05 #7

"Eric Enright" <er**@tiptsoft.com> wrote in message
news:sl*****************@yamano.tiptsoft.com...
Skybuck Flying wrote:
CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN WHY THE INTEGER TYPES IN C AND DELPHI ARE SO FUCKED IP?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
I think thats enough coffee for you today.


Lol, I am drinking pepsi right now =D

--
Eric Enright /"\
ericAtiptsoftDcom \ / ASCII Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML E-Mail
Public Key: 0xBEDF636F / \

Nov 14 '05 #8

"Keith Thompson" <ks***@mib.org> wrote in message
news:ln************@nuthaus.mib.org...
"Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> writes:
Ok,

I am getting really sick of all these integers types. Not only in C... but mostly in C.

WHY DOESN'T ANSI MAKE THESE TYPES A STANDARD

sint8
uint8 [...]
That's BULLSHIT :D

[...]
THAT S WHY I AM GETTING REALLY SICK OF IT :DDDDD

[...]

As it happens, there's a perfectly reasonable answer to your question.
Ask it again, without shouting and swearing at us, and I'll tell you
what it is.

I don't necessarily object to "dirty" words as such, and I can even
sympathize with your frustration, but a little politeness goes a long
way. This isn't alt.flame.


Ok,

How about this one:

Why god why ? :)
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst> San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst> We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

Nov 14 '05 #9

<Je***********@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote in message
news:2l************@uni-berlin.de...
Skybuck Flying <no****@hotmail.com> wrote:
sint8 c;
c = 128; // oops ? is signed int max 127 or 128 ? hmmm
c = -128; // <-- hmm never seen that so I am pretty sure sint8 is -127 to 128 =DDD yess
Live isn't that simple: assuming that sint8 is meant to be a signed
8 bit wide integer type, for a two-complements machine the values it
can store range from -128 to + 127, while on a one-complements
machine only from -127 to +127...


Examples please of one complements and two complements machines with actual
c compilers !

Besides from that it has nothing to do with sint8 vs short int... since both
will have the same problem.

Yet one of them is easier to use !
Regards, Jens
--
\ Jens Thoms Toerring ___ Je***********@physik.fu-berlin.de
\__________________________ http://www.toerring.de

Nov 14 '05 #10

"Emmanuel Delahaye" <em**********@noos.fr> wrote in message
news:Xn***************************@212.27.42.74...
In 'comp.lang.c', "Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> wrote:
I am getting really sick of all these integers types. Not only in C...
but mostly in C.

WHY DOESN'T ANSI MAKE THESE TYPES A STANDARD

sint8
uint8

sint16
uin16

sint32
uint32

sint64
uint64
Get a C99 compiler.

But keep in mind that on some machines (DSP, for example), a byte is wider
that 8 bits! Sorry if you feel sick again..

I use my own typedefs

http://mapage.noos.fr/emdel/clib/ed/inc/TYPES.H


typedef unsigned char uchar;
typedef signed char schar;
typedef unsigned short ushort;
typedef unsigned int uint;
typedef unsigned long ulong;

That's what I call sick ! :D

How are you going to call int64 ? or int128 ? or int256 ?

and is fine to me. Just keep in mind the minimum requested values for each
type, and don't go furher, even if the implementation allows it.

For example :
uchar : 0..0xFF
uint/ushort : 0..0xFFFF
ulong : 0..0xFFFFFFFF

simple as that.

--
-ed- get my email here: http://marreduspam.com/ad672570
The C-language FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
C-reference: http://www.dinkumware.com/manuals/reader.aspx?lib=c99
FAQ de f.c.l.c : http://www.isty-info.uvsq.fr/~rumeau/fclc/

Nov 14 '05 #11

<Je***********@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote in message
news:2l************@uni-berlin.de...
Skybuck Flying <no****@hotmail.com> wrote:
sint8 c;
c = 128; // oops ? is signed int max 127 or 128 ? hmmm
c = -128; // <-- hmm never seen that so I am pretty sure sint8 is -127 to 128 =DDD yess


Live isn't that simple: assuming that sint8 is meant to be a signed
8 bit wide integer type, for a two-complements machine the values it
can store range from -128 to + 127, while on a one-complements
machine only from -127 to +127...


Besides from that... suppose many of these types of machines exist then the
recommendation is really simple:

In the documentation clearly state:

When using sint8 it's wise to limit the range from -127 to 127 so that code
works on one and two complement systems

Voila ! :D

Any problems with that ? :)

Nov 14 '05 #12
In 'comp.lang.c', "Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> wrote:

"Emmanuel Delahaye" <em**********@noos.fr> wrote in message
news:Xn***************************@212.27.42.74...
In 'comp.lang.c', "Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> wrote:
> I am getting really sick of all these integers types. Not only in C...
> but mostly in C.
>
> WHY DOESN'T ANSI MAKE THESE TYPES A STANDARD
>
> sint8
> uint8
>
> sint16
> uin16
>
> sint32
> uint32
>
> sint64
> uint64


Get a C99 compiler.

But keep in mind that on some machines (DSP, for example), a byte is wider
that 8 bits! Sorry if you feel sick again..

I use my own typedefs

http://mapage.noos.fr/emdel/clib/ed/inc/TYPES.H


typedef unsigned char uchar;
typedef signed char schar;
typedef unsigned short ushort;
typedef unsigned int uint;
typedef unsigned long ulong;

That's what I call sick ! :D

How are you going to call int64 ? or int128 ? or int256 ?


The C99 standard doesn't define objetcs with a minimum range fitting in more
that 64 bits.

I should probably call them

typedef unsigned long long ullong;

Could be a problem with the next version of the standard.

--
-ed- get my email here: http://marreduspam.com/ad672570
The C-language FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
C-reference: http://www.dinkumware.com/manuals/reader.aspx?lib=c99
FAQ de f.c.l.c : http://www.isty-info.uvsq.fr/~rumeau/fclc/
Nov 14 '05 #13
"Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> writes:
"Keith Thompson" <ks***@mib.org> wrote in message
news:ln************@nuthaus.mib.org...
"Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> writes:
Ok,

I am getting really sick of all these integers types. Not only in C... but mostly in C.

WHY DOESN'T ANSI MAKE THESE TYPES A STANDARD

sint8
uint8

[...]
That's BULLSHIT :D

[...]
THAT S WHY I AM GETTING REALLY SICK OF IT :DDDDD

[...]

As it happens, there's a perfectly reasonable answer to your question.
Ask it again, without shouting and swearing at us, and I'll tell you
what it is.

I don't necessarily object to "dirty" words as such, and I can even
sympathize with your frustration, but a little politeness goes a long
way. This isn't alt.flame.


Ok,

How about this one:

Why god why ? :)


You're not nearly as funny as you think you are.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Nov 14 '05 #14
Emmanuel Delahaye <em**********@noos.fr> writes:
[...]
I use my own typedefs

http://mapage.noos.fr/emdel/clib/ed/inc/TYPES.H


which says:
] typedef unsigned char uchar;
] typedef signed char schar;
] typedef unsigned short ushort;
] typedef unsigned int uint;
] typedef unsigned long ulong;

How are these abbreviations helpful? They don't convey any additional
information to the reader; all they do is save some typing.

If you want an unsigned char, just use "unsigned char".

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Nov 14 '05 #15
Emmanuel Delahaye <em**********@noos.fr> writes:
[...]
The C99 standard doesn't define objetcs with a minimum range fitting in more
that 64 bits.
The C99 standard requires int8_t, int16_t, int32_t, and int64_t if the
corresponding exact-width types are supported. It allows (and,
arguably, encourages) intN_t for any supported size. If an
implementation provides a 128-bit integer type, I would expect it to
declare int128_t. (Likewise for uintN_t, of course.)
I should probably call them

typedef unsigned long long ullong;


Again, I don't see how that's useful. The type is unsigned long long;
just call it that.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Nov 14 '05 #16
In 'comp.lang.c', Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> wrote:
] typedef unsigned char uchar;
] typedef signed char schar;
] typedef unsigned short ushort;
] typedef unsigned int uint;
] typedef unsigned long ulong;

How are these abbreviations helpful? They don't convey any additional
information to the reader; all they do is save some typing.

If you want an unsigned char, just use "unsigned char".


Yes, it's debatable, but type saving is sometimes not an option in a
professional environment.

--
-ed- get my email here: http://marreduspam.com/ad672570
The C-language FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
C-reference: http://www.dinkumware.com/manuals/reader.aspx?lib=c99
FAQ de f.c.l.c : http://www.isty-info.uvsq.fr/~rumeau/fclc/
Nov 14 '05 #17
Emmanuel Delahaye <em**********@noos.fr> writes:
In 'comp.lang.c', Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> wrote:
] typedef unsigned char uchar;
] typedef signed char schar;
] typedef unsigned short ushort;
] typedef unsigned int uint;
] typedef unsigned long ulong;

How are these abbreviations helpful? They don't convey any additional
information to the reader; all they do is save some typing.

If you want an unsigned char, just use "unsigned char".


Yes, it's debatable, but type saving is sometimes not an option in a
professional environment.


Huh? What does a "professional environment" have to do with it?

There are numerous ways to define abbreviations (in your text editor,
for example) without inflicting them on your readers.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Nov 14 '05 #18
On Fri, 9 Jul 2004, Skybuck Flying wrote:

SF>
SF>"Eric Enright" <er**@tiptsoft.com> wrote in message
SF>news:sl*****************@yamano.tiptsoft.com...
SF>> Skybuck Flying wrote:
SF>> >CAN SOMEBODY EXPLAIN WHY THE INTEGER TYPES IN C AND DELPHI ARE SO FUCKED
SF>IP
SF>> >?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!
SF>>
SF>> I think thats enough coffee for you today.
SF>
SF>Lol, I am drinking pepsi right now =D

That's even worse...

harti
Nov 14 '05 #19
"Keith Thompson" <ks***@mib.org> wrote in message
news:ln************@nuthaus.mib.org...
Emmanuel Delahaye <em**********@noos.fr> writes:
[...]
I use my own typedefs

http://mapage.noos.fr/emdel/clib/ed/inc/TYPES.H


which says:
] typedef unsigned char uchar;
] typedef signed char schar;
] typedef unsigned short ushort;
] typedef unsigned int uint;
] typedef unsigned long ulong;

How are these abbreviations helpful? They don't convey any additional
information to the reader; all they do is save some typing.


Patently untrue; they also save some reading, which is - arguably - of
benefit for function parameter lists and casts.

Alex
Nov 14 '05 #20
In 'comp.lang.c', Keith Thompson <ks***@mib.org> wrote:
Yes, it's debatable, but type saving is sometimes not an option in a
professional environment.


Huh? What does a "professional environment" have to do with it?


Deadlines, things like that...

--
-ed- get my email here: http://marreduspam.com/ad672570
The C-language FAQ: http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
C-reference: http://www.dinkumware.com/manuals/reader.aspx?lib=c99
FAQ de f.c.l.c : http://www.isty-info.uvsq.fr/~rumeau/fclc/
Nov 14 '05 #21
"Skybuck Flying" <no****@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:cc**********@news3.tilbu1.nb.home.nl:
/*----------------------------------------------------------------
** TYPE S32
**----------------------------------------------------------------
*/
#define INT_32_MAX (0x7FFFFFFF)
#define INT_32_MIN (0xFFFFFFFF)

#if (SCHAR_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef signed char S32;
#elif (SHRT_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef short int S32;
#elif (INT_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef int S32;
#elif (LONG_MAX == INT_32_MAX)
typedef long S32;
#else
# error "Cannot define type S32."
#endif

HUH ??????????????????????


What can't you understand about this very simple preprocessing snippet?
I DONT WANT ANY IFDEFS !
Then take them out and just leave the typedef, good grief.
I WANT A COMPILER THAT CAN UNDERSTAND

SINT32
UINT32


It can as soon as you include your myBaseTypes.h file (with the safety
check ifdefs removed).

--
- Mark ->
--
Nov 14 '05 #22
Skybuck Flying wrote:
[...]
HUH ??????????????????????

I DONT WANT ANY IFDEFS !

I WANT A COMPILER THAT CAN UNDERSTAND

SINT32
UINT32

Or something like that...

So that everybody on the planet can easily write:

sint32 main()

[...]

And when you put this program on a system that doesn't have 32-bit
integers, then what?

Just make a header file that #define's the types you want, and be done
with it.

--
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+
| Kenneth J. Brody | www.hvcomputer.com | |
| kenbrody at spamcop.net | www.fptech.com | #include <std_disclaimer.h> |
+-------------------------+--------------------+-----------------------------+

Nov 14 '05 #23
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 23:19:12 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
<no****@hotmail.com> wrote:
I am getting really sick


I agree.

--
Al Balmer
Balmer Consulting
re************************@att.net
Nov 14 '05 #24
On Thu, 8 Jul 2004 23:19:12 +0200, "Skybuck Flying"
<no****@hotmail.com> wrote in comp.lang.c:
Ok,

I am getting really sick of all these integers types. Not only in C... but
mostly in C.

WHY DOESN'T ANSI MAKE THESE TYPES A STANDARD

sint8
uint8
Because there are C implementations for processors that DON'T HAVE
8-bit data types. I'm working with one now.

[snip]
THE SHITTY SHIT IS !!!:


*plonk*

The signal to noise ratio has improved already...

--
Jack Klein
Home: http://JK-Technology.Com
FAQs for
comp.lang.c http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html
comp.lang.c++ http://www.parashift.com/c++-faq-lite/
alt.comp.lang.learn.c-c++
http://www.contrib.andrew.cmu.edu/~a...FAQ-acllc.html
Nov 14 '05 #25

This thread has been closed and replies have been disabled. Please start a new discussion.

Similar topics

9
by: hokieghal99 | last post by:
Hi, I'm trying to do this: ------------------------------ a="192." b="168." c="1." r = range(256) for r in r:
7
by: Jus! | last post by:
Hi. I am reading bits(1's & 0's) from a file and i wa wondering what is the most efficient method of converting these strings to individual int's? eg. File contains: 110001 010011 etc......
4
by: mchoya | last post by:
Hello all, I want to display a list of ints for example 100, 1000, 10000 as prices $1.00, $10.00, $100.00. Can I do this? I guess I have to use the iomanip lib. But the only manipulators I...
3
by: uclamathguy | last post by:
I am working on connected component analysis, but that is irrelevant. I have a mapping containing ints as the keys and sets of ints as the "values." Given an integer, I need to iterate through...
3
by: Chris N. Hinds | last post by:
I have a question regarding accessing long long ints in unions. I have constructed a union with a double, two ints in a structure, and a long long int. When the double is loaded with a...
4
by: Hal Styli | last post by:
/*hello could someone please help me with the errors i get related to pointers to arrays of ints. I want to declare something like int *d = { 7, 11, 18, 54, 64, 55, 37, 38, }; rather than...
4
by: Bill Moran | last post by:
I hadn't really looked at this until I started having problems with it. For those who haven't been following along, I'm converting an application originally written in MSSQL to Postgres. I'm a...
10
by: bg_ie | last post by:
Hi, I have a function which compares two unsigned ints and returns their difference in order to establish which is the greater of the two. int Compare(unsigned int time_left, unsigned int...
32
by: fermineutron | last post by:
A while back i tried to calculate factorials of large numbers using arrays in C, the array encoded integer arithemetic that i wrote in C was very slow, it would take almost a second to multiply 2...
8
by: DaTurk | last post by:
Hi, I was just curious how you would go about creating a unique identifier with 3 ints.
0
by: DolphinDB | last post by:
Tired of spending countless mintues downsampling your data? Look no further! In this article, you’ll learn how to efficiently downsample 6.48 billion high-frequency records to 61 million...
0
by: ryjfgjl | last post by:
ExcelToDatabase: batch import excel into database automatically...
0
by: Vimpel783 | last post by:
Hello! Guys, I found this code on the Internet, but I need to modify it a little. It works well, the problem is this: Data is sent from only one cell, in this case B5, but it is necessary that data...
0
by: jfyes | last post by:
As a hardware engineer, after seeing that CEIWEI recently released a new tool for Modbus RTU Over TCP/UDP filtering and monitoring, I actively went to its official website to take a look. It turned...
0
by: ArrayDB | last post by:
The error message I've encountered is; ERROR:root:Error generating model response: exception: access violation writing 0x0000000000005140, which seems to be indicative of an access violation...
1
by: PapaRatzi | last post by:
Hello, I am teaching myself MS Access forms design and Visual Basic. I've created a table to capture a list of Top 30 singles and forms to capture new entries. The final step is a form (unbound)...
1
by: CloudSolutions | last post by:
Introduction: For many beginners and individual users, requiring a credit card and email registration may pose a barrier when starting to use cloud servers. However, some cloud server providers now...
1
by: Defcon1945 | last post by:
I'm trying to learn Python using Pycharm but import shutil doesn't work
1
by: Shællîpôpï 09 | last post by:
If u are using a keypad phone, how do u turn on JavaScript, to access features like WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram....

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.