Re: different compilers: different standard types?????

[Marius Amado Alves <maa@liacc.up.pt>]

I have a related problem, at least with GNAT 3.15p, the compiler of all us 
poor academics.

The standard requires that "the range of Integer should be no wider than that 
of Long_Integer" 3.5.4 (25). (I'm not sure this is an intelligent limitation, 
but never mind.) GNAT defines Integer and Long_Integer for 32-bit, and 
Long_Long_Integer for 64-bit.

So if you want to define an integral type with a greater range than (the 
associated with) 32 bits, you have to use Long_Long_Integer as a base. But 
then you hinder portability, because Long_Long_Integer is not standard.

So I guess my question is: Why does not GNAT define Integer (and Long_Integer) 
for 64-bits? AFAICS the standard does not impose a upper limit on Integer. 
And don't tell me the answer is: Because then Short_Integer would have 
32-bits, and that is not what the C world calls short.

Thanks.