Lpc2000

First of all, re: standards, the old C86/C89/ISO90 Standard will go on for 
a quite a while. Most (embedded) compilers have not moved to fully support 
C99 and do not appear to have too much pull to do so. I am not aware of 
this "latest standard" you mention but I have not tracked comp.std.c or 
some such for a while.

Second, if you want to be portable and care about the actual # of bits, you 
should always use your own typdefs such as

uint32, uint64 etc. anyway.

At 08:03 AM 11/9/2005, rtstofer wrote:

>I have noticed that many folks are using 'unsigned long' for 32 bit
>entities and I got to wondering if I am doing things wrong (again!)
>
>Looking at limits.h I come up with:
>
>unsigned char -> 8 bits
>unsigned short int -> 16 bits
>unsigned int -> 32 bits
>unsigned long -> 32 bits or 64 bits depending on architecture
>
>Assuming that I care that my code is portable, what is the
>considered opinion on unsigned int versus unsigned long for 32 bit
>entities?
>
>

// richard (This email is for mailing lists. To reach me directly, please 
use richard at imagecraft.com)