long long

[Joerg Arndt]

* Niels Möller <nisse at lysator.liu.se> [Aug 02. 2012 14:41]:
> Marc Glisse <marc.glisse at inria.fr> writes:
> 
> > Ok, now I've criticized intmax_t enough,
> 
> I guess this is an age old problem of backwards compatibility. As I have
> understood it, originally in C, long was intended to be the largest
> integer type supported by the compiler, which was usually 32 bits. When
> 64-bit arithmetic was introduced, long couldn't be extended to 64 bits
> for fear of breaking too much old code, and thus long long was invented.
> And now intmax_t is suffering more or less the same process as long...
> 
> Regards,
> /Niels
> 
> [...]

Is there any platform _apart_ from Windows64 where
  sizeof long != length of general purpose CPU registers
?

If the answer is "no", we clearly have to decide
whether to start this work for Windows only.
(And in that case my answer would be the second "no").

Best,  jj