1

So in my exam in the class I was supposed to declare X as a short unsigned. I declared it short unsigned int X. Is this way still OK and correct? Thank you

Bokacc
  • 13
  • 3
  • It goes for all built-in integral types, check this [answer](https://stackoverflow.com/a/7176690/14624729). – rawrex Jun 24 '21 at 13:47
  • You can declare it as `unsigned short X` – FaisalM Jun 24 '21 at 13:48
  • 1
    These are all the same, which to use is a matter of *style*: `short unsigned`, `unsigned short`, `int short unsigned`, `short int unsigned`, `short unsigned int`, `int unsigned short`, `unsigned int short`, `unsigned short int` – Eljay Jun 24 '21 at 13:55
  • Reminder: most of the integer types are based on range, not bitwidth. For example, I could have a 32-bit processor that uses a 32-bit value for `char` or `short`, and still be compatible with the language. – Thomas Matthews Jun 24 '21 at 16:41

1 Answers1

3

Yes, short unsigned int and short unsigned are exactly the same type.

Personally I prefer unsigned short for readability.

See for yourself by testing

std::is_same<short unsigned int, short unsigned>::value
Bathsheba
  • 231,907
  • 34
  • 361
  • 483