From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-57139-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 31840 invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2002 17:56:13 -0000
Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/>
List-Post: <mailto:gcc@gcc.gnu.org>
List-Help: <http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/>
Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org
Received: (qmail 31832 invoked from network); 25 Jul 2002 17:56:12 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO potter.sfbay.redhat.com) (205.180.83.107)
  by sources.redhat.com with SMTP; 25 Jul 2002 17:56:12 -0000
Received: from dot.sfbay.redhat.com (dot.sfbay.redhat.com [172.16.24.7])
	by potter.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6PHuRQ00844;
	Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:56:27 -0700
Received: (from rth@localhost)
	by dot.sfbay.redhat.com (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g6PHuCv27076;
	Thu, 25 Jul 2002 10:56:12 -0700
X-Authentication-Warning: dot.sfbay.redhat.com: rth set sender to rth@redhat.com using -f
Date: Thu, 25 Jul 2002 13:25:00 -0000
From: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>
To: Momchil Velikov <velco@fadata.bg>
Cc: Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: Undefined behavior in 950605-1.c
Message-ID: <20020725105612.A27073@redhat.com>
Mail-Followup-To: Richard Henderson <rth@redhat.com>,
	Momchil Velikov <velco@fadata.bg>,
	Alan Modra <amodra@bigpond.net.au>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
References: <8765z4e391.fsf@fadata.bg> <jen0sg87zx.fsf@sykes.suse.de> <87n0sgi154.fsf@fadata.bg> <20020725102412.GV26054@bubble.sa.bigpond.net.au> <873cu83skp.fsf@fadata.bg>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5.1i
In-Reply-To: <873cu83skp.fsf@fadata.bg>; from velco@fadata.bg on Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 03:22:46PM +0300
X-SW-Source: 2002-07/txt/msg01228.txt.bz2

On Thu, Jul 25, 2002 at 03:22:46PM +0300, Momchil Velikov wrote:
> Alan> Ah, but what is the promoted type of "unsigned char"?  int!

Except if sizeof(char) == sizeof(int).

> Isn't that the case with architectures
> with a definition of PROMOTE_MODE, which does not change UNSIGNEDP or
> sets it to 1, e.g, ARM, PPC, V850 ?

PROMOTE_MODE has nothing to do with C types.  It's for efficiency
in the generated rtl *only*.  If a strictly conforming program can
notice the existance of PROMOTE_MODE, there is a bug.


r~