On Thu, 19 Jun 2008, James Chacon wrote:
sh(1)'s test (-current/amd64) doesn't deal with big numbers (>
MAXINT)
I think it would make sense to use intmax_t. We already do that for
the integers in shell arithmatic with the $((...)) syntax.
Isn't that wrong then for 64bit machines where int is 32 and the
spec says
"signed long" is what should be used here?
I don't see anything in the spec about integer sizes. I am looking at
<http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/test.html>.
intmax_t, being the largest signed integer type supported by the
compiler, is guaranteed to be at least as large as "signed long", and
may be larger. Where do you see a spec that requires "signed long"
and
forbids anything larger than that?