From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8119 invoked by alias); 13 Jul 2005 19:00:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 8009 invoked by uid 22791); 13 Jul 2005 19:00:12 -0000 Received: from exprod6og8.obsmtp.com (HELO psmtp.com) (64.18.1.128) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with SMTP; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 19:00:12 +0000 Received: from source ([192.150.20.142]) by exprod6ob8.obsmtp.com ([64.18.5.12]) with SMTP; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 12:00:09 PDT Received: from inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com ([153.32.1.51]) by outbound-smtp-2.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j6DJ6DTK021008 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 12:06:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from iplan-mn (iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com [10.32.16.20]) by inner-relay-1.corp.adobe.com (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id j6DJ05n2020039 for ; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 12:00:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from iplan-mn (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.02 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IJK00C75Y45JP@iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com> for gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 14:00:05 -0500 (CDT) Received: from mn-eljay-a51m.adobe.com (mn-dhcp-17-28.corp.adobe.com [10.32.17.28]) by iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.02 (built Oct 21 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IJK00CRRY45JL@iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com> for gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2005 14:00:05 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2005 19:00:00 -0000 From: Eljay Love-Jensen Subject: RE: Strange shifting behaviour In-reply-to: To: John Yates , corey taylor Cc: Ulf Magnusson , gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org Message-id: <6.2.1.2.2.20050713135957.0214fa98@iplan-mn.corp.adobe.com> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT References: X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00135.txt.bz2 Hi John, >It depends on whether you want acknowledge the impression that your compiler makes on users who are not language lawyers. It's not a GCC issue. The behavior is undefined by the C and C++ standards. In my opinion, I prefer that the compiler-at-compiler-time didn't perform the "format my hard drive" as the compiler specific undefined behavior that may occur during the executable run of my own program. But that's just me. YMMV. Sincerely, --Eljay