Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: time_t size: The year 2038 bug? | Date | Tue, 11 Jan 2000 02:00:21 -0300 | From | Horst von Brand <> |
| |
Jesse Pollard <pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil> said:
[...]
> yes it is. but the number of bits is not. On a 32 bit system "long long" is > 64 bits. On a 64bit system it is 128. And if you need more bits that > that you are out of luck. "long long" is imprecise, I'd prefer a construct > like "int var: 64". This way I know exactly how many bits are available. > If I need 128 bits for something (or even 4096) then I can define them. Or > is there going to be a "long long long long" for 128 bits, and "long long > long long long long .... long" to reach 4096?
COBOL gives you this (sort of) >:-}
[You could use some multiprecicion library for this, if you _really_ need it. Something I somehow doubt, at least I'm sure you don't need it bad enough for all other C users to suffer it] -- Horst von Brand vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl Casilla 9G, Viña del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |