Re: COMP vs. COMP-5
From: Frederico Fonseca (real-email-in-msg-spam_at_email.com)
Date: 03/29/04
- Next message: clvrmnky: "Re: COMP vs. COMP-5"
- Previous message: Brenda: "new programmer"
- In reply to: clvrmnky: "COMP vs. COMP-5"
- Next in thread: clvrmnky: "Re: COMP vs. COMP-5"
- Reply: clvrmnky: "Re: COMP vs. COMP-5"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 29 Mar 2004 17:49:33 +0100
On Mon, 29 Mar 2004 11:17:12 -0500, clvrmnky
<clvrmnky-uunet@coldmail.com.invalid> wrote:
>Greetings,
>
>I just need a sanity check on my understanding of COMP, COMP-5. My
>understanding is that, in terms of value representation, these two are
>identical.
>
>That is, if I'm confronted with a compiler that does not like COMP-5, I
>can just change things to COMP without having to rethink my PIC clauses.
>They are both binary representations of a given size.
Which compiler (vendor and version) are you using?
>
>My understanding is that it is the internal representation that is
>different, primarily that COMP-5 values can be stored in a smaller space
>than COMP.
compiler dependent, along with compile options in force.
Frederico Fonseca
ema il: frederico_fonseca at syssoft-int.com
- Next message: clvrmnky: "Re: COMP vs. COMP-5"
- Previous message: Brenda: "new programmer"
- In reply to: clvrmnky: "COMP vs. COMP-5"
- Next in thread: clvrmnky: "Re: COMP vs. COMP-5"
- Reply: clvrmnky: "Re: COMP vs. COMP-5"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
