From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] Is this a bug in 8c? From: "rob pike" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Fri, 15 Mar 2002 08:51:56 -0500 Topicbox-Message-UUID: 677a77d8-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 > long long is an "integer type" according to the meaning > of that term in the C standard. .... > ... snide self-superiority ... > 8c is apparently > riddled with *intentional* bugs. Just a minute here. I'm not apologizing for long long not supporting ?:, because I think it really should, but nonetheless: a) long long is not an integer type according to the ANSI C standard I hold in my hand. Perhaps it is in C9X, but it's not even mentioned in the old standard. It isn't a type at all as far as the standard is concerned. I know other compilers came to implement it, but where in the 1989 standard - the one 8c was written to - does it mention long long? b) 8c is not "riddled" with "intentional bugs". Be careful who you call snide and self-superior. I think the strongest honest statement you could make as far as long long is concerned is that some of the operations on the long long extension are unimplemented. That is a far cry from "riddled" with "intentional bugs". -rob