From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21174 invoked by alias); 30 Dec 2002 20:42:17 -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 21161 invoked from network); 30 Dec 2002 20:42:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO rose.csi.cam.ac.uk) (131.111.8.13) by 209.249.29.67 with SMTP; 30 Dec 2002 20:42:16 -0000 Received: from student.cusu.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.179.82] helo=kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk ident=mail) by rose.csi.cam.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18T6jc-0006L6-00; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:42:04 +0000 Received: from jsm28 (helo=localhost) by kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk with local-esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18T6jc-00012d-00; Mon, 30 Dec 2002 20:42:04 +0000 Date: Mon, 30 Dec 2002 15:46:00 -0000 From: "Joseph S. Myers" X-X-Sender: To: Neil Booth cc: Subject: Re: Lots of bugs in ? In-Reply-To: <20021230202603.GA11137@daikokuya.co.uk> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-SW-Source: 2002-12/txt/msg01600.txt.bz2 On Mon, 30 Dec 2002, Neil Booth wrote: > Reading the C standard carefully leads me to believe that the macros > like > > UINT_MAX, LONG_MIN > > etc. should be values, and not typed integer constants like "65535U" > nor expressions like "(-LONG_MAX - 1)". They are "constant expressions suitable for use in #if preprocessing directives", "expressions that have the same type as would an expression that is an object of the corresponding type converted according to the integer promotions", as required by C99. As I've already pointed out on libc-alpha , Dinkumware's page is simply wrong about the requirements for the macros, which are specified as applying to constants (not constant expressions), both before and after TC1. -- Joseph S. Myers jsm28@cam.ac.uk