Home/ Questions/Q 7816229
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-06-02T05:47:37+00:00

I came across a code like below: #define SOME_VALUE 0xFEDCBA9876543210ULL This SOME_VALUE is assigned

  • 0

I came across a code like below:

#define SOME_VALUE 0xFEDCBA9876543210ULL

This SOME_VALUE is assigned to some unsigned long long later.

Questions:

  1. Is there a need to have postfix like ULL in this case ?
  2. What are the situation we need to specify the type of integer used ?
  3. Do C and C++ behave differently in this case ?
Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    In C, a hexadecimal literal gets the first type of int, unsigned int, long, unsigned long, long long or unsigned long long that can represent its value if it has no suffix. I wouldn’t be surprised if C++ has the same rules.

    You would need a suffix if you want to give a literal a larger type than it would have by default or if you want to force its signedness, consider for example

    1 << 43;

    Without suffix, that is (almost certainly) undefined behaviour, but 1LL << 43; for example would be fine.

    • 0