Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Portable 16 bit binary integer write
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 10:54:41 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <lnwpi7wza6.fsf@kst-u.example.com>
References: <50a1e8f4-4fb3-4491-97d0-54768bf28685@googlegroups.com> <b89ceb12-0c5b-4f0f-ad4a-a74d470b56de@googlegroups.com> <nrf2rf$5ha$1@dont-email.me> <0b757bbb-0494-44cb-bd5a-26f117aaa404@googlegroups.com> <nrgcuu$9hr$1@dont-email.me> <2cf666d7-0755-4c70-adad-07dbafc2b2e7@googlegroups.com> <nrhbt5$l7r$1@dont-email.me> <c9cb703c-db1b-4baa-9622-538aeaca5652@googlegroups.com> <lnk2ebzaxe.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <09cb4413-16a6-4b63-89d0-9dafe56562f6@googlegroups.com> <lnfuozz3ea.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <68e53f3a-5fcc-44fc-90c4-bcf8dc3db680@googlegroups.com> <ln7faayyhf.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <e52a2d87-580e-4223-a258-3a002f972757@googlegroups.com> <lna8f5xigd.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <nrmjdv$j4t$1@dont-email.me> <ln60psyh1n.fsf@kst-u.example.com> <nrn3l3$f9d$1@dont-email.me> <46fcfdac-a18e-4ee4-8f57-33fd9bce02cd@googlegroups.com> <e499t5FtdveU3@mid.individual.net> <48e74afb-1f97-4c30-aff7-e982c543653f@googlegroups.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="945944de09706c9b4e29b53c9d2efdc2"; logging-data="4122"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+kN1uddzC2Q8A3O0pB7zrJ"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:SKzxWej6qibBtCWKy7D0dYF2/Ow= sha1:+jIt8DMiXabKV6dnrfLyuDiQ9TQ=
Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:93808

supercat@casperkitty.com writes:
[...]
> What static assertion could a program use to indicate that it will only
> work on implementations where signed overflow will never have any side-
> effect other than yielding a value which may behave as though it has non-
> deterministic "upper bits"?

No such static assertion is possible in unextended standard C.

Since you're obviously fascinated with the idea of supporting
such assertions, why don't you write up a concrete proposal?
(You could post it on your blog.)

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org  <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something.  This is something.  Therefore, we must do this."
    -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"