John Matthews wrote: > --- In c-prog@yahoogroups.com, Thomas Hruska <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> b = (UInt64)(((UInt32)a) * ((UInt32)a)); > > Would this be even safer: > > b = (UInt64)a * (UInt64)a; > > ?
That would do something different. It really depends on what exactly you want to do. I'd still probably end up wrapping the whole thing up in one final typecast just-because-I-can. The compiler will probably end up ignoring the final typecast as a no-op. -- Thomas Hruska CubicleSoft President Ph: 517-803-4197 *NEW* MyTaskFocus 1.1 Get on task. Stay on task. http://www.CubicleSoft.com/MyTaskFocus/
