Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: two's complement idea
Date: Sat, 09 Nov 2019 05:55:28 -0800
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <86tv7dcfxr.fsf@linuxsc.com>
References: <qppva0$cbj$1@news.albasani.net> <chine.bleu-5DC1AD.19552804112019@reader.eternal-september.org> <qpqv6g$kc3$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="bd07fdb0e7610947dc98257bdadc7724"; logging-data="9605"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/j3PExBwROyBfSN43fY2wqkIB2XSPA6ow="
User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:D4hbi4ybnOxL9rWzR1xJ8n5WbhY= sha1:ObVaBki6gThzWr+/dFzVmgRh7IU=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c++:69677

"Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> writes:

> On 05.11.2019 03:55, Siri Cruise wrote:
>
>> In article <qppva0$cbj$1@news.albasani.net>,
>>   Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> What would realls speak against that numieric_limits<type> would include
>>> a flag whether a type has a two's complement and maybe another flag that
>>> says that a type has a two's complement wrap-around?
>>
>> #define ONESCOMPLEMENT (-1==~1)
>> #define TWOSCOMPLEMENT (-1==~0)
>
> Nice idea.
>
> But please use `constexpr` or `const` declarations, not macros.
>
> Using macros conveys the idea that macros are a reasonable solution to
> the problem of naming a compile time constant.

Why do C++ fans hate the C preprocessor so much?