Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Abstract Syntax Tree for C programs
Date: Thu, 30 May 2019 14:15:48 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <lnsgsvr6d7.fsf@kst-u.example.com>
References: <feb250dd-88d8-41d0-9c19-8376f943f9a7@googlegroups.com> <87sgt339na.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <m0wGE.581043$XY4.391056@fx32.am4> <80470a36-78de-417f-bc75-a7966c87b31e@googlegroups.com> <llDGE.1694806$iiB1.205828@fx08.am4> <9cbcea67-85a8-4de3-ac01-04922ba5fc74@googlegroups.com> <HBZGE.398991$iy4.303434@fx06.am4> <lnblzntma9.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <Hw8HE.541380$II6.345396@fx07.am4> <qcj9n9$7iu$1@dont-email.me> <rlaHE.491469$6s.287699@fx39.am4> <a49301ee-56c1-4359-a97c-bcac1c9ffeab@googlegroups.com> <HSaHE.494938$6s.422110@fx39.am4> <d18e9aaf-ba4f-4b35-81cc-48782d121948@googlegroups.com> <HLfHE.1571400$XN1.651280@fx23.am4> <7cff3be5-0432-4a90-92ed-50c74cc1eb6b@googlegroups.com> <CawHE.1573385$XN1.171804@fx23.am4> <slrn3tncqettfc.7a8.ike@iceland.freeshell.org> <JYCHE.753767$yl5.567343@fx19.am4> <87y32oj208.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <PKOHE.459529$ry6.346109@fx11.am4>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="12abe26c90a56a4d813a45bedf6a8101"; logging-data="22916"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/w+f9Aji377Syk5GFrVxU6"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:39NNRebArTc75biCZS9f/OnsCBU= sha1:N0sb2iJz+eh3eRch8ZU4cYbxAgQ=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:144157

Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]
> It seems reasonable. That u8+u8 produces a signed result is 
> counter-intuitive and surprising. (My table was produced by turning 
> results of assorted calculations into floats, but that can't pick up 
> u8+i8->i32. I know see I should have used generics.)
>
> What I had always assumed (wrongly) was that mixed sign arithmetic was 
> done as unsigned, irrespective of widths:
[...]

You could have saved yourself a lot of time and trouble if you had just
read the relevant part of the C standard.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */