At least the first 31 or 63 characters of an internal name are significant? [closed]

问题

As it currently stands, this question is not a good fit for our Q&A format. We expect answers to be supported by facts, references, or expertise, but this question will likely solicit debate, arguments, polling, or extended discussion. If you feel that this question can be improved and possibly reopened, visit the help center for guidance.

Closed 7 years ago.

Here's a direct quote from the Book (K&R, 2nd ed, p. 35):

"At least the first 31 characters of an internal name are significant. For function names and external variables, the number may be less than 31, because external names may be used by assemblers and loaders over which the language has no control. For external names, the standard guarantees only for 6 characters and a single case."

And in C99 there is no length limitation on its internal names, but only the first 63 are guaranteed to be significant (§5.2.4.1 Translation Limits).

My question is why are these limits specifically 31 or 63? Why this number specifically? Why not 19, 24 or any other number? If it's an implementation issue, is there a benefit from making it 31 or 63?

回答1:

The compiler/linker writers associated with a language design committee usually impose some limits so that they can make assumptions in the implementation of the toolchain or in the accompanying binary file formats (e.g., ELF, COFF, etc). The numbers 31 and 63 were probably chosen simply because they are 2ⁿ-1 and programmers like 2ⁿ for some silly reason. The -1 is usually to account for either a leading _ or a trailing NUL character in the name.

来源：https://stackoverflow.com/questions/10141422/at-least-the-first-31-or-63-characters-of-an-internal-name-are-significant