From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,232e89dd4cc3c154
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,232e89dd4cc3c154
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 101deb,dea70f96af442ea2
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 103376,232e89dd4cc3c154
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: 
 gid4516fb5702,gid8d3408f8c3,gidbda4de328f,gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news2.google.com!news4.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Uno <Uno@example.invalid>
Newsgroups: sci.math,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG.
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 01:04:03 -0600
Message-ID: <91v675F30vU1@mid.individual.net>
References: <4dae2a4b$0$55577$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
 <4db90113$0$77724$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
 <ipbjqf$q4k$1@dont-email.me> <ipd5i2011p@news6.newsguy.com>
 <ipd83f$5at$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net IIw/5w3zKqa4393zCU3sSw4wH136drsHqoDiPsZPK6SfbBlLQ+
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Jyn+fgyvQguDbqhaXJDHSzA4px8=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110223 Thunderbird/3.1.8
In-Reply-To: <ipd83f$5at$1@dont-email.me>
Xref: g2news2.google.com sci.math:234234 comp.lang.c:126627
 comp.lang.fortran:41285 comp.lang.pl1:2423 comp.lang.ada:20057
Date: 2011-04-29T01:04:03-06:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 04/28/2011 08:34 PM, glen herrmannsfeldt wrote:
> In comp.lang.fortran David Bernier<david250@videotron.ca>  wrote:
>
> (snip)
>> All we have now are George Marsaglia's posts and writings.
>> I know there's now a move on the way to 64-bit processors,
>> which I take to mean the x86_64 or AMD64 design/instruction set.
>
> I have an actual Itanium system, but not so many people do.
>
>> In any case, with an executable compiled with a C compiler,
>> there's the function sizeof, which might be useful
>> in some cases at run time.
>
> Well, sizeof is a compile time constant, but, yes, you can
> use the value at run time.
>
> (snip)
>> AFAIK, sizeof(unsigned long) can be relied upon to give the size
>> in 8-bit bytes of a C "unsigned long".
>
> No.  You need CHAR_BIT to tell how many bits are in a char.
> It has been known to get to 64 on word addressed 64 bit machines.
> It must be at least 8, but can be more.
>
> -- glen

I'm dealing with this same issue in my real life, as my algebraist uncle 
seems to have early-onset alzheimer's.   So he has his demonstrable 
achievements in science and the last few years where he embarrassed himself.

George's C was atrocious at the end.  I'd like to let that die.

A kiss is a kiss; it's simple, effective, and not improved by 
redefinition when you've lost your marbles.
-- 
Uno