From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <1411330.QJAbfBr5F9@blitz>
References: <CAL3m8eAf2Yjpg77wtykTSPnyKHxKHYc5YWfWH2L8CNjc86P1kA@mail.gmail.c>
	<CAL3m8eDJEo6o+srxuYpKSGDmM+0KgQhC15u7Qxg4TvnpO57Zgw@mail.gmail.c>
	<c16d42fafcb9d73a58f0f9b4882393ce@brasstown.quanstro.net>
	<1411330.QJAbfBr5F9@blitz>
Date: Sat,  5 May 2012 18:41:52 +0200
Message-ID: <CANUoZoHBjRQpLxGMn2vr7jBd=7K=WYNkn7vsKa9kcraMhf0fdQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: David du Colombier <0intro@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [9fans] integer width on AMD64 (was: Re: AMD64 system)
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 840ef3a8-ead7-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> my impression is, int was supposed to match machine's preferred (best
> performance etc.) integeral datatype, and long was supposed to be enough to
> hold a pointer? (i.e., sizeof(long) >= sizeof(void*))

No, long is always 32-bit on Plan 9. uintptr is big enough to hold a pointer.

--
David du Colombier