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,FREEMAIL_FROM
	autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 109d8a,232e89dd4cc3c154
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
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: 
 gid9ef9b79ae9,gid4516fb5702,gid8d3408f8c3,gidbda4de328f,gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news2.google.com!news3.google.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: sci.math,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.pl1,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: KISS4691, a potentially top-ranked RNG.
Date: Mon, 02 May 2011 12:42:32 +1200
Message-ID: <926cvoFj03U8@mid.individual.net>
References: <4dae2a4b$0$55577$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
 <4db90113$0$77724$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net>
 <4dbd6e9c$0$12957$892e0abb@auth.newsreader.octanews.com>
 <925saiFj03U7@mid.individual.net> <ipks9f$b43$2@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net TrOHMuVuY+sqDac64VDb8gD7DNXOVksUC4Dhq2JK2EfcuV/NbE
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Cni8SUfFdpqLpDYQf5hU3D/6S0Y=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US;
 rv:1.9.2.9) Gecko/20101021 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.4
In-Reply-To: <ipks9f$b43$2@dont-email.me>
Xref: g2news2.google.com sci.math:234593 comp.lang.c:126727
 comp.lang.fortran:41556 comp.lang.pl1:2449 comp.lang.ada:20087
Date: 2011-05-02T12:42:32+12:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 05/ 2/11 12:01 PM, James Kuyper wrote:
> On 05/01/2011 03:58 PM, Ian Collins wrote:
>> On 05/ 2/11 03:31 AM, Thad Smith wrote:
>>>
>>> Here is a modification of the program with masking to produce correct results
>>> with any conforming C implementation.  It truncates where when required.  A good
>>> optimizer should eliminate the unneeded masking for 32-bit unsigned long.
>>
>> Why oh why can't people just use fixed width types?
>
> Because, in C at least, it's not mandatory for a conforming
> implementation to support any of the fixed-width types.

But it's hardly rocket science to declare them for implementations that 
lack them.

-- 
Ian Collins