From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15693 invoked by alias); 28 Jun 2005 21:41:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-owner@gcc.gnu.org Received: (qmail 15685 invoked by uid 22791); 28 Jun 2005 21:41:21 -0000 Received: from us02smtp1.synopsys.com (HELO vaxjo.synopsys.com) (198.182.60.75) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 21:41:21 +0000 Received: from crone.synopsys.com (crone.synopsys.com [146.225.7.23]) by vaxjo.synopsys.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79AADDC7E; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:41:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from piper.synopsys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by crone.synopsys.com (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id OAA19242; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:41:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from piper.synopsys.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by piper.synopsys.com (8.12.10/8.12.3) with ESMTP id j5SLfIOe010446; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:41:18 -0700 Received: (from jbuck@localhost) by piper.synopsys.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/Submit) id j5SLfH2Y010444; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 14:41:17 -0700 Date: Tue, 28 Jun 2005 21:41:00 -0000 From: Joe Buck To: Robert Dewar Cc: Paul Koning , galibert@pobox.com, dave.korn@artimi.com, aph@redhat.com, gdr@integrable-solutions.net, pinskia@physics.uc.edu, gcc@gcc.gnu.org Subject: Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC) Message-ID: <20050628214117.GB10397@synopsys.com> References: <20050628171752.GE52889@dspnet.fr.eu.org> <20050628180203.GG52889@dspnet.fr.eu.org> <42C19C5A.2040705@adacore.com> <20050628191746.GJ52889@dspnet.fr.eu.org> <42C1A318.4040407@adacore.com> <17089.45177.781373.794318@gargle.gargle.HOWL> <42C1B206.3000705@adacore.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <42C1B206.3000705@adacore.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg01205.txt.bz2 On Tue, Jun 28, 2005 at 04:24:38PM -0400, Robert Dewar wrote: > Paul Koning wrote: > > >And also because most people believe that C applies normal computer > >arithmetic, and they believe that normal computer arithmetic is > >wrapped 2's complement. (And indeed it usually is, give or take some > >bizarre exceptions like MAX_INT % -1) > > and not so bizarre exceptions like machines that trap on signed > overflow. That's a non-issue in practice, because no C compiler uses such instructions by default.