From: Al Viro Sent: 1/14/2006 10:25:34 AM > On Sat, Jan 14, 2006 at 09:38:44AM -0800, Kris Katterjohn wrote: > > From: Lennert Buytenhek > > Sent: 1/14/2006 9:23:19 AM > > > Hmmm, is 'long' guaranteed to be signed? > > > > > > --L > > > > All integral types are except "char". > > That would get you about B-... > > a) char itself is not an integer type; signed char and unsigned char > are. > b) _Bool is unsigned and it is an integer type. > c) it's implementation-dependent whether bitfields declared as > int are signed or unsigned; signed int is needed there to get guaranteed > signed behaviour. > > That said, original question would qualify for F...
I learned C with K&R (ANSI) and it says: "The signed specifier is useful for forcing char objects to carry a sign; it is permissible but redundant with other integral types." So from that I got that char was of integral type because it says it's redundant for _other_ integral types. And I got that char is the only integral type that is not signed by default. It's certainly possible I'm wrong about char itself not being an integer, and I almost never use _Bool, so I didn't think about it being integral probably because I'm used to Java's boolean type. And bitfields didn't even cross my mind when I sent that last email :) But in this case (the patch) the changes are okay... right? Kris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
