This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format:	[Raw text]

Re: 128-bit long long?

From: Paolo Carlini <pcarlini at suse dot de>
To: Scott Robert Ladd <coyote at coyotegulch dot com>
Cc: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 20:38:34 +0100
Subject: Re: 128-bit long long?
References: <405DB46B.80208@coyotegulch.com> <8765cykqws.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com> <405DEB4F.4020604@coyotegulch.com>

Scott Robert Ladd wrote:

I always wondered why C99 didn't define both int128_t and uint128_t in <stdint.h>.

However, according to 7.18.1.1, p3, intN_t and uintN_t are *all* optional.

I wonder if any 64 bit architecture actually provides 128bit integer types,
typedef-ed in stdint.h. Sparc64?!? s390x?!?

Paolo.

References:
- 128-bit long long?
  - From: Scott Robert Ladd
- Re: 128-bit long long?
  - From: Zack Weinberg
- Re: 128-bit long long?
  - From: Scott Robert Ladd

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]