Re: [RFC][PATCH] A generic boolean

[Vadim Lobanov]

On Wed, 19 Jul 2006, Jeff Garzik wrote:

> ricknu-0@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > Citerar Jeff Garzik <jeff@xxxxxxxxxx>:
> >> Also, you don't want to force 'unsigned char' on code, because often
> >> code prefers a machine integer to something smaller than a machine integer.
>
> > But isn't a bit smaller than a byte? Sorry, do not understand what you mean.
>
> For all processors, it is generally preferred to have integer operations
> performed on a "machine integer."  A machine integer is the natural data
> type of the processor.  If it's a 32-bit processor, the natural data
> type for the ALU is a 32-bit int.  If it's a 64-bit processor, the
> natural data type for the ALU is a 64-bit int.

If this is the case, then wouldn't "long" be preferable to "int"?

> 	Jeff

-- Vadim Lobanov
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/