468,512 Members | 1,487 Online
Bytes | Developer Community
New Post

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Post your question to a community of 468,512 developers. It's quick & easy.

Actual type of intmax_t and uintmax_t

Hello all,

In section the Standard says that intmax_t and uintmax_t
designate signed and unsigned integer types capable of representing any
value of any signed or unsigned integer type, respectively.

Is this restricted to Standard types like long long and unsigned long
long or must intmax_t and uintmax_t take into account any extended
width types provided by the implementation? For example if an
implementation provides a 128 bit integer type, should intmax_t and
uintmax_t be typedefs for this type?

The wording "capable of representing any value of any (un)signed integer
type" is ambiguous.


Dec 1 '07 #1
1 5885
On Dec 1, 3:34 pm, santosh <santosh....@gmail.comwrote:
The wording "capable of representing any value of any (un)signed integer
type" is ambiguous.
That means UINTMAX_MAX is guaranteed to be equal or bigger than any
other unsigned integral _MAX type.
Dec 1 '07 #2

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

11 posts views Thread by javadesigner | last post: by
6 posts views Thread by Vijay Kumar R Zanvar | last post: by
29 posts views Thread by shmartonak | last post: by
11 posts views Thread by bill | last post: by
9 posts views Thread by Joanna Carter \(TeamB\) | last post: by
4 posts views Thread by cbrichards via SQLMonster.com | last post: by
1 post views Thread by fmendoza | last post: by
By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.