From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9469 invoked by alias); 29 Jun 2005 00:48:49 -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 9457 invoked by uid 22791); 29 Jun 2005 00:48:45 -0000 Received: from nile.gnat.com (HELO nile.gnat.com) (205.232.38.5) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.30-dev) with ESMTP; Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:48:45 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3368F9605; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 20:48:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from nile.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (nile.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 07130-01-2; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 20:48:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (taconic.gnat.com [205.232.38.103]) by nile.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 040829601; Tue, 28 Jun 2005 20:48:44 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <42C1EFEA.6020602@adacore.com> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2005 00:48:00 -0000 From: Robert Dewar User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Gabriel Dos Reis CC: Georg Bauhaus , gcc mailing list Subject: Re: signed is undefined and has been since 1992 (in GCC) References: <27fdc0d8dc588cfdb3a14a153c5d037c@physics.uc.edu> <6d9fa260f233e519762c7d11276a35ad@physics.uc.edu> <3dbad9a6bd7eb1aea74ff2245eaa1b99@physics.uc.edu> <42C115D5.8070503@adacore.com> <42C13D4D.9040604@adacore.com> <42C14930.40402@adacore.com> <42C1D610.6030701@futureapps.de> <42C1EAEF.8010400@adacore.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2005-06/txt/msg01223.txt.bz2 Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > Robert Dewar writes: > > | Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: > | > | > C is > | > trustworthy (and preferred over SML for that curcial part of the proof > | > checker) because the mapping of the C code to the generated assembly > | > code is straighforward and amenable to inspection. > | > | This kind of traceability is of course vital for such applications, but > | it is by no means unique to C, > > Nobody claims it is unique to C. You're after the wrong target. > > | and there is a big difference between saying > | that C is an assembly language, and that the mapping of C to assembly > | language is transparent. > > Oh, you denied any connection in previous message. Not at all, all languages are connected to assembly language in the sense that you can write assembly language that corresponds to the semantics of the language. How WYSIWYG the language is does indeed vary. C is very close to meeting this criterion 100%, but that's a far cry from calling it an assembly language itself. Of course I did not "deny any connection" with asm. You did not read anything even vaguely saying that in what I wrote.