🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <42vd3s$t58@news.cs.tu-berlin.de>,
mfx@cs.tu-berlin.de (Markus Freericks) wrote:
>In article <zudUwQ9ytVYE084yn@csn.net> thads@csn.net (Thad Smith) writes:
>> Byte is defined in the Standard to be "the unit of data storage large
>> enough to hold any member of the basic character set of the execution
>> environment..."  I was going to say that the defined connection
>> between a byte and type char is rather loose, but found that the
>> sizeof operator give the size of an object or type in "bytes" and also
>> that sizeof (char) is defined to be 1.  This seems to establish that a
>> char must be the same size as a byte.
>
>Wouldn't it simplify the understanding of the standard if the term "byte"
>was either totally removed from the standard (as it is currently synonymous
>with "char"), or totally separated from it?

I agree.  Defining sizeof (char) to be one byte is a rather
round-about way of equating the two, IMHO.  It is interesting to note
that CHAR_BIT defines the number of bits in a byte, not a char.

Thad