Re: What is with gcc, anyway?!?

1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User

Welcome to IWETHEY!

Post #171,158 by lordbeatnik 8/26/04 11:05:40 PM Reply	Re: What is with gcc, anyway?!? It looks reasonable to me that 0x8000000 got promoted to unsigned int. If it wasn't, what would be the point of having the unsigned types in the list? That's why the unsigned types are not listed for decimal numbers but are for hex. 0x80000000 wouldn't be positive as an int, so it got promoted to unsigned int. Thus, the MAX returns 0x80000000. Dave "LordBeatnik"
Post #171,207 by jb4 8/27/04 9:39:19 AM Reply	I guess... What you say makes sense. The problem here is the phrase in the standard The type of an integer constant is the first of the corresponding list in which its value can be represented. [emphasis added] 0x8000000 certainly "can be represented" as an int, so silly /me thought that, if it "can be represented" as an int, it would be. Thanx for the input! jb4 shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub* + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf.* BULLSHIT
Post #171,402 by lordbeatnik 8/27/04 6:51:20 PM Reply	If there was no ambiguity... If there were no ambiguities in standards, what reason would they have to host another party^Wstandards meeting? 8) Dave "LordBeatnik"
Post #171,751 by jb4 8/30/04 5:29:20 PM Reply	For the next set of standards? /me slaps head in disbelief that I even thought that... jb4 shrub\ufffdbish (Am., from shrub* + rubbish, after the derisive name for America's 43 president; 2003) n. 1. a form of nonsensical political doubletalk wherein the speaker attempts to defend the indefensible by lying, obfuscation, or otherwise misstating the facts; GIBBERISH. 2. any of a collection of utterances from America's putative 43rd president. cf.* BULLSHIT

What is with gcc, anyway?!? - (jb4) - (52) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:07:59 PM EDT

What is typeof(0x80000000)? - (ChrisR) - (7) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:25:16 PM EDT

right, add an L -NT - (deSitter) - (6) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:30:08 PM EDT

Ain't that a UL - (ChrisR) - (5) - Aug. 26, 2004, 06:34:49 PM EDT

This is why C is sometimes called "high-level assembler." - (static) - (1) - Aug. 26, 2004, 09:11:16 PM EDT

Re: This is why C is sometimes called "high-level assembler. - (jb4) - Aug. 27, 2004, 09:35:47 AM EDT

Actually, that would be a U (or u) - (jb4) - (2) - Aug. 27, 2004, 09:43:22 AM EDT

What about casting the values? - (ChrisR) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:34:46 AM EDT

Yes, that was the solution I used - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:55:24 AM EDT

Re: What is with gcc, anyway?!? - (lordbeatnik) - (3) - Aug. 26, 2004, 11:05:40 PM EDT

I guess... - (jb4) - (2) - Aug. 27, 2004, 09:39:19 AM EDT

If there was no ambiguity... - (lordbeatnik) - (1) - Aug. 27, 2004, 06:51:20 PM EDT

For the next set of standards? - (jb4) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:29:20 PM EDT

Hex constants are assumed to be positive - (Arkadiy) - (36) - Aug. 27, 2004, 11:32:17 AM EDT

Re: Hex constants are assumed to be positive - (jb4) - (35) - Aug. 27, 2004, 01:15:45 PM EDT

Setting the high bit is processor dependent. - (hnick) - (34) - Aug. 27, 2004, 01:27:28 PM EDT

OK, then the standard should be saying - (Arkadiy) - (33) - Aug. 27, 2004, 01:53:36 PM EDT

No I actually write code based on them - (jb4) - (30) - Aug. 27, 2004, 02:27:25 PM EDT

Ignore them and use my common sence -NT - (Arkadiy) - (29) - Aug. 27, 2004, 03:24:32 PM EDT

I'll bet debugging your code is a real joy... - (jb4) - (28) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:29:56 PM EDT

Nope - (Arkadiy) - (27) - Aug. 31, 2004, 10:04:06 AM EDT

And so tell me, O Oracle of Common Sence [sic] - (jb4) - (26) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:04:10 AM EDT

offensive foul, ball to Ark - (deSitter) - (3) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:10:45 AM EDT

Rest assured, - (Arkadiy) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:17:52 AM EDT

:) ok -NT - (deSitter) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:25:55 AM EDT

OK, OK... - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:26:59 AM EDT

Well, while the tone is disagreable, the question is - (Arkadiy) - (21) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:14:05 AM EDT

Point missed. - (jb4) - (20) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:25:35 AM EDT

If C were sane, TRUE = -1 and problem vanishes -NT - (deSitter) - (7) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:26:40 AM EDT

Ermm...say What? - (jb4) - (2) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:28:42 AM EDT

Re: Ermm...say What? - (deSitter) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:37:26 AM EDT

Much like Jewish law - (Arkadiy) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:43:34 AM EDT

So you prefer how VB does it?? -NT - (ben_tilly) - (3) - Aug. 31, 2004, 01:01:31 PM EDT

Point: Ben... -NT - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 01:04:18 PM EDT

How it used to do it. - (ChrisR) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 01:47:19 PM EDT

Hehee! - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 03:18:32 PM EDT

Why do you expect hex to be treated differently from decimal - (Arkadiy) - (11) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:32:44 AM EDT

Re: Why do you expect hex to be treated differently - (deSitter) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:42:16 AM EDT

Man, that's a good question! - (jb4) - Aug. 31, 2004, 12:37:46 PM EDT

Now that's clarity! -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (8) - Aug. 31, 2004, 04:42:17 PM EDT

Nope, it's bad math - (deSitter) - (7) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:00:03 PM EDT

But, counters of real things don't need negative values. -NT - (a6l6e6x) - (6) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:19:13 PM EDT

I'd like to add a negative number of votes for Bush. ;-) -NT - (ben_tilly) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:20:08 PM EDT

That only works on Diebold machines. :) -NT - (a6l6e6x) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:23:34 PM EDT

Certainly - (deSitter) - (3) - Aug. 31, 2004, 05:21:51 PM EDT

"Expressive", not "pithy" :) - (Arkadiy) - (2) - Aug. 31, 2004, 06:59:29 PM EDT

Re: "Expressive", not "pithy" :) - (deSitter) - (1) - Aug. 31, 2004, 07:03:32 PM EDT

Dunno. - (Arkadiy) - Sept. 1, 2004, 09:33:56 AM EDT

Wasn't trying to piss you off... - (hnick) - (1) - Aug. 27, 2004, 04:06:40 PM EDT

Interesting assumption: - (jb4) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:51:55 PM EDT

Hmm...while the datatype will be first reached, - (Simon_Jester) - (1) - Aug. 27, 2004, 05:35:03 PM EDT

True, but... - (jb4) - Aug. 30, 2004, 05:55:52 PM EDT

Re: What is with gcc, anyway?!? - (gdaustin) - Aug. 31, 2004, 11:10:58 PM EDT

iwethey.org

Fun is fun to have.
196 ms