Are there platforms where the size of shorts is actually larger than 16bits

Question

As far as I know the standard says that the size of the short type must be at least 16 bits.

Now I'm wondering if there are actually platforms where shorts are 32 bit or even larger.

I'm aware of stddef.h and that the types defined there should be used if a certain size is required.

@FelixPalmen The bounty'd answer provides an example of an architecture where `CHAR_BIT == 32`. Given that `short` cannot be smaller than `char`, it follows that `short` is 32-bit or larger. — EOF, Nov 16 '17 at 17:10
@EOF for a duplicate, it's not enough that an answer also answers this question "by accident" -- it must basically ask the same thing. — , Nov 16 '17 at 17:11

score 2 · Accepted Answer · answered Nov 16 '17 at 17:03

2

Yes. You can find an example here (well, not 32 bit, but "larger than 16"). The example given there is the UNICOS operating system for "Cray" supercomputers, which has 64bit short.

answered Nov 16 '17 at 17:03

OK, thanks. So I suppose shorts > 16 bits are still rather exotic. – Jabberwocky Nov 16 '17 at 17:06
@MichaelWalz indeed, but what do you do with this information? If it's possible, portable code must be prepared for it ;) – Nov 16 '17 at 17:07
It's more of curiosity. – Jabberwocky Nov 16 '17 at 17:10
32-bit short may exist [even on modern DSPs](https://stackoverflow.com/a/38360262/995714) – phuclv Jul 30 '18 at 09:49

score 0 · Answer 2 · answered Nov 16 '17 at 17:11

0

IIRC some exotic implementation of C99 above (in/for) Common Lisp (or perhaps only SBCL) has been coded with all of char, short, int being 32 bits exactly.

But I could be wrong.

answered Nov 16 '17 at 17:11

Basile Starynkevitch

223,805
18
296
547

Are there platforms where the size of shorts is actually larger than 16bits

2 Answers2