From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gcc-return-116559-listarch-gcc=gcc.gnu.org@gcc.gnu.org>
Received: (qmail 19378 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2005 18:37:00 -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 19334 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jun 2005 18:36:55 -0000
Received: from dspnet.fr.eu.org (HELO dspnet.fr.eu.org) (213.186.44.138)
    by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:36:55 +0000
Received: by dspnet.fr.eu.org (Postfix, from userid 1007)
	id C0DEE34D17; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 20:35:51 +0200 (CEST)
Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 18:37:00 -0000
From: Olivier Galibert <galibert@pobox.com>
To: Dave Korn <dave.korn@artimi.com>
Cc: 'Robert Dewar' <dewar@adacore.com>,
	Theodore.Papadopoulo@sophia.inria.fr,
	'Michael Veksler' <VEKSLER@il.ibm.com>, gcc@gcc.gnu.org
Subject: Re: The utility of standard's semantics for overflow
Message-ID: <20050629183551.GA85796@dspnet.fr.eu.org>
References: <42C29092.8070708@adacore.com> <SERRANOBWFXbEJSGdvy0000029b@SERRANO.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <SERRANOBWFXbEJSGdvy0000029b@SERRANO.CAM.ARTIMI.COM>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i
X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg01270.txt.bz2

On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 02:12:40PM +0100, Dave Korn wrote:
>   In fact, doesn't this suggest that in _most_ circumstances, *saturation*
> would be the best behaviour?

No, you'd be killing most emulators and a lot of virtual machine
implementations.

  char x = (char)((unsigned char)y + (unsigned char)z)

is too ugly to live.

  OG.