From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20345 invoked by alias); 7 Feb 2018 17:25:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 19192 invoked by uid 89); 7 Feb 2018 17:25:20 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=REASONING, credit, Kindly, kindly X-HELO: smtp01.uc3m.es Received: from smtp01.uc3m.es (HELO smtp01.uc3m.es) (163.117.176.131) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 07 Feb 2018 17:25:18 +0000 Received: from smtp01.uc3m.es (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE07394095; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 18:25:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from smtp01.uc3m.es (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id B030F9408D; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 18:25:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from triangulo.it.uc3m.es (unknown [163.117.139.109]) by smtp01.uc3m.es (Postfix) with ESMTPS; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 18:25:15 +0100 (CET) Received: from nbd.it.uc3m.es (root@nbd.it.uc3m.es [163.117.139.192]) by triangulo.it.uc3m.es (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3sarge3) with ESMTP id w17HPFWK022392 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=EDH-RSA-DES-CBC3-SHA bits=168 verify=NO); Wed, 7 Feb 2018 18:25:15 +0100 Received: from nbd.it.uc3m.es (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by nbd.it.uc3m.es (8.13.1/8.13.1/Debian-15) with ESMTP id w17HPBge003684; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 18:25:11 +0100 Received: (from ptb@localhost) by nbd.it.uc3m.es (8.13.1/8.13.1/Submit) id w17HPBlE003682; Wed, 7 Feb 2018 18:25:11 +0100 From: "Peter T. Breuer" Message-Id: <201802071725.w17HPBlE003682@nbd.it.uc3m.es> Subject: Re: signed/unsigned integer conversion for right shift seems To: jwakely.gcc@gmail.com (Jonathan Wakely) Date: Wed, 07 Feb 2018 17:25:00 -0000 Cc: ptb@inv.it.uc3m.es (Peter Breuer), david@westcontrol.com (David Brown), lh_mouse@126.com (lh_mouse), gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org (gcc-help) In-Reply-To: from "Jonathan Wakely" at Feb 07, 2018 04:39:21 PM X-Anonymously-To: Reply-To: ptb@inv.it.uc3m.es X-WebTV-Stationery: Standard\; BGColor=black\; TextColor=black Reply-By: Sat, 1 Apr 2006 14:21:08 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-imss-scan-details: No--17.633-5.0-31-10 X-TMASE-Version: IMSVA-9.1.0.1689-8.2.1013-23648.001 X-TMASE-Result: 10--17.632500-10.000000 X-TMASE-MatchedRID: 6lay9u8oTUMv2k3M27J31vHkpkyUphL9ix+K88kLVD2mPVDJNbpM8C9z yzJUEnZkjrhZRacF/B8n+TB00h6ke7VVkXkpal3qRAvohSJUpI86En2bnefhoNqCxkzSpW/XiO9 fzG806wtQ4kDgHrtrT5Hp+cUhePXyNdyCBd6LtFdMjOs0JtPravZXuNUAS5u+5DJ1FS+XdBMgvo zLhnWJLZ0Meba/6tCxv2LKnk2ZSgbgvZSgHfth2txajlW+zwxCIM86Aeo6sYIifM7JMNHW61cq2 fypMLLjqQSZBgEX4IgNkDMJaAcf5m73VCPhyCfjwEbFmwMi1zM6QNs2WCY79Rc+nzs86r3Gb1k1 DG7DYLfhRWs7SH9Y/EQJ6OI6HWeChhPUxqfbauNjoaO27r+3fbpAJMK7N+JVRoS5c9eVHmoVIFW akuIsUpLgFA2bYXD4kZOl7WKIImq0P2qkGU0XygtuKBGekqUpPjKoPgsq7cA= X-TMASE-SNAP-Result: 1.821001.0001-0-1-12:0,22:0,33:0,34:0-0 X-SW-Source: 2018-02/txt/msg00055.txt.bz2 "Also sprach Jonathan Wakely:" > > On 7 February 2018 at 16:34, Peter T. Breuer wrote: > > I'll repeat the paragraph from my summary this morning. > > Please don't, your sophistry is still off-topic. Repeating it doesn't Kindly explain why explaining is off-topic in your opinion. > make it any less so. Sophistry \Soph"ist*ry\, n. [OE. sophistrie, OF. sophisterie.] The art or process of reasoning; logic. [Obs.] [1913 Webster] Correct. I am exact, which is the minimum anyone can be. > The insight you finally gave me credit for wasn't even mine It is. Kindly point to somebody who says it before you? For example, I see from you Tue 16.45: You've already been told that 6.5.7 says "The integer promotions are performed on each of the operands. " and says nothing about conversions. which is not it. Either you still don't get what IT is, or ... I don't know. To give you the clue, here is my response (my caps) at 20.11: I see nothing that says that conversions should NOT be applied to their operators. Got it yet? Here is where you did give the clue. I'll help again with caps: > What, specifically, do you see in 6.5.7 that allows the > conversion specified by the general rule of conversions > > If one operand has an unsigned type T whose conversion rank is > at least as high as that of the other operand's type, then the other > operand is converted to type T. > > NOT to be applied? > > BECAUSE it doesn't say they are applied. As I pointed out in Get it? You finally exposed your REASONING, for the very first and only time. That single instance of displayed reasoning was enough for me. You could have saved yourself you had merely gone to that ordinary length beforehand, but no. > originally, but as I'd also said in an earlier mail, you aren't paying > attention. Too busy stroking yourself for being so clever. I am not clever! Just ordinary! > Now please go away, you tedious fart. Pot. PTB