What's wrong with long long?

[Dik T. Winter]

> I first encountered the need to represent numbers larger than those
> representable by 32 bit ints about 3 days after leaving university, when
> dealing with Turkish Lira.
>
> 2,147,483,647 TRL is currently less than £800/$1500, so that's a
> reasonably common use I'd say.

Do they really go to the Lira in accounting and whatever? The last time
I was there, the last four digits were zero and cut off on most price
lists.

 

[Dan Pop]

Governments are not the world's top spenders. One of my clients transacted
over 6Trln Euros last year just on one trading desk in one locale.

Trillion is no better defined than billion and I have a feeling that
Mark McIntyre is not using the British definition (1e18, i.e. a million
cubed).

Dan

 

[pete]

I use long longs occasionally.
I know there are some limitations regarding
the standards such as not using long long constants but what's the big
deal? Why is long long not used so much?

It's not C89.

 

[Tom St Denis]

It's not C89.

More reason to use them I guess. C99-ish compilers are so easy to come by
there is no reason not to use it.

Tom

 

[Dan Pop]

More reason to use them I guess. C99-ish compilers are so easy to come by
there is no reason not to use it.

How do you write C99 code that is portable to C99-ish compilers?

The last thing I'd want to use is a compiler that is mostly conforming to
a certain specification.

Yes, I know, no compiler is perfectly conforming, due to the inherent
bugs in an application as complex as a modern compiler, but there is
a whole world of difference between an obscure compiler bug and the
conformance problems of gcc -std=c99 (e.g. some C99 features are available
with subtly different semantics: the semantics of GNU C).

Dan