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: Scott Robert Ladd <coyote at coyotegulch dot com>
To: Zack Weinberg <zack at codesourcery dot com>
Cc: gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org
Date: Sun, 21 Mar 2004 14:21:51 -0500
Subject: Re: 128-bit long long?
References: <405DB46B.80208@coyotegulch.com> <8765cykqws.fsf@egil.codesourcery.com>

Zack Weinberg wrote:

Best current practice appears to be to provide an "extended integral
type" __int128.  This doesn't have the problems of 'long long' because
it's not a *basic* integral type (in particular, it cannot be used for
size_t).

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

..Scott

Follow-Ups:
- Re: 128-bit long long?
  - From: Paolo Carlini

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

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