microsoft / microsoft/ifc-spec
Integer Fundamental Type Precisions
Open
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- TeX
- Stars
- 94
- Forks
- 11
- Avg merge
- 1d 29m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 2
Description
I'm curious why the IFC specifies default, short, and long, but not long long for fundamental type precision?
The IFC writes out:
long long= int w/ 64-bit precisionlong= int w/ long precisionint= int w/ default precision
This seems like an odd discrepancy (some builtin types represented via bitwidth and some are represented via a label)?
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
The issue names no file, test, or entry point. Start by reviewing the IFC specification's fundamental-type precision definitions and compare the treatment of default, short, long, and long long; done means an agreed specification decision is recorded.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- documentation
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Needs clarification
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100