/bin/sh and 32-bit arithmetics [CORRECTED]

[Alex Semenyaka]

On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 08:50:29PM -0500, Juli Mallett wrote:
> may be doing more work than is necessary.  Simply switching to
> "long" in place of "int" for everything (and LONG_ vs INT_) may be
> a better start than using intmax_t?  intmax_t may be very slow,

That %qd is just a misktake, sorry. Should be %jd. Wrong merge.

Then, I used jost 'long long' but people from -hackers told me that
the right way is intmax_t. Well, if it conforms to the current style
I can switch it back. Or, use some kind of explicit type.

Just long instead of int is not enough for i386 since it is 32-bit type.

> might be for building i386 with 64-bit long (ha ha ha), and that
> seems what you want- a wider type on a sucky architecture ;)

Well it is a bit sucky but not too much _here_ actually. There is
nothing special with 64-bit arithmetics.

> As for the INTMAX_LEN or whatnot, that's bogusish.  There are ways
> of (at run time) deducing the maximum size of a buffer for a

I asked people about the _typical_ solution. Nobody answered, unfortunatelly.

> <fooint>, probably you can shove them into some init routine that
> sh surely has.
> 
> Also, I don't know how we feel about C++/C99 style comments in
> the base system.

Oh, I see. I'll change it, it is the easiest thing here

> Thanx,
> juli (who imagines bde would have better advice.)

Really would like to read any opinion from the experienced people.

							SY, Alex