Re: FAQ issue: Guaranteed value ranges of fundamental types?
From: infobahn (infobahn_at_btinternet.com)
Date: 02/05/05
- Next message: Victor Bazarov: "Re: Sequence point problem?"
- Previous message: infobahn: "Re: Why is "Hello World" const char* ?"
- In reply to: Victor Bazarov: "Re: FAQ issue: Guaranteed value ranges of fundamental types?"
- Next in thread: Victor Bazarov: "Re: FAQ issue: Guaranteed value ranges of fundamental types?"
- Reply: Victor Bazarov: "Re: FAQ issue: Guaranteed value ranges of fundamental types?"
- Reply: Mark McIntyre: "Re: FAQ issue: Guaranteed value ranges of fundamental types?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2005 20:30:18 +0000 (UTC)
Victor Bazarov wrote:
>
> I wonder what _exactly_ does your copy say in 3.9.1/1 that makes you
> derive that 'char <= short <= int'. But that doesn't matter. You are
> actually correct, the C standard defined those relationships between
> type sizes.
C&V please.
- Next message: Victor Bazarov: "Re: Sequence point problem?"
- Previous message: infobahn: "Re: Why is "Hello World" const char* ?"
- In reply to: Victor Bazarov: "Re: FAQ issue: Guaranteed value ranges of fundamental types?"
- Next in thread: Victor Bazarov: "Re: FAQ issue: Guaranteed value ranges of fundamental types?"
- Reply: Victor Bazarov: "Re: FAQ issue: Guaranteed value ranges of fundamental types?"
- Reply: Mark McIntyre: "Re: FAQ issue: Guaranteed value ranges of fundamental types?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]