[no subject]
On Mon, 23 Jun 2014 11:35:11 +0200, Vincent Lefèvre wrote:
> > On 2014-06-18 09:28:28 -0400, Michel Hack wrote:
> > Right away, we run into an issue for some implementations: 128 is
> > not "small enough" for CHAR when CHAR is considered to be signed!
>
> This is something specific to the C language. What is a char in
> other languages?
My point was that C signed char is the smallest standard "small integer"
type that I know. I would like decorations to be representable by any
language's "small integer" datatype, whatever it is called.
It's true that C programmers can always use an explicit "unsigned char",
but they have to be careful, since the default signedness of "char" is
implementation-defined.
Michel.
---Sent: 2014-06-23 14:55:05 UTC