From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-help-return-20985-listarch-gcc-help=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 14413 invoked by alias); 26 Jul 2005 21:54:08 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-help/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gcc-help-help@gcc.gnu.org>
Sender: gcc-help-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 14398 invoked by uid 22791); 26 Jul 2005 21:54:05 -0000
Received: from smtp-102-tuesday.nerim.net (HELO kraid.nerim.net) (62.4.16.102)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:54:05 +0000
Received: from uniton.integrable-solutions.net (gdr.net1.nerim.net [62.212.99.186])
	by kraid.nerim.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8AB4F40E26;
	Tue, 26 Jul 2005 23:54:02 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from uniton.integrable-solutions.net (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.10/8.12.10/SuSE Linux 0.7) with ESMTP id j6QLqPpI013864;
	Tue, 26 Jul 2005 23:52:26 +0200
Received: (from gdr@localhost)
	by uniton.integrable-solutions.net (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id j6QLqPNh013863;
	Tue, 26 Jul 2005 23:52:25 +0200
To: Martin Wodok <m.wodok@osb-ag.de>
Cc: gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: C++: No Warning for passing value > 255 as parameter to a function requiring "unsigned char"
References: <200507221551.02486.m.wodok@osb-ag.de>
	<m3ll3yzynz.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>
	<200507261115.45744.m.wodok@osb-ag.de>
From: Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net>
In-Reply-To: <200507261115.45744.m.wodok@osb-ag.de>
Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2005 21:54:00 -0000
Message-ID: <m3mzo944me.fsf@uniton.integrable-solutions.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-SW-Source: 2005-07/txt/msg00289.txt.bz2

Martin Wodok <m.wodok@osb-ag.de> writes:

| Hi Gaby
| hi Eljay,
| 
| thanks for your answer!
| 
| > Martin Wodok <m.wodok@osb-ag.de> writes:
| > | Assigning 1000 is of course out of bounds for "unsigned char", thus the
| >
| > No, it is not.  Unsigned integer types are modulo types; it is no overflow.
| 
| Yes, they're modulo types, that's why this is NOT an error,

The argument was that it makes sense to issue a warning when the the
code is dubious -- not just an error.  However, in this case, modulo
arithmetic for unsigned int is a characteristic propery.
Consequently, it does not make much sense to warn about it.

-- Gaby