Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.php > #4470

Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast

Show all headers | View raw

On 1/15/2012 10:08 PM, lb wrote:
> jstucklex@attglobal.net wrote:
>> ...
>> No, it is not.  '0x12' is a hex number, not an integer.  (int)'0x12'
>> converts this correctly to 0.
>
> OK, but if (int)'0x12' is 0, why is '0x12'+0 == 18?
>
> Why are they different? Aren't they both doing 'string conversion to number'?

As I said - '0x12' is a hex value, not an integer.  You are trying to 
convert it as if it were a string representation of an integer.  The 
implicit conversion recognizes it is a hex value and uses the 
appropriate conversion.

-- 
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

Back to comp.lang.php | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Implied cast differs from explicit cast lb <lb2048@pobox.com.delete> - 2012-01-16 01:10 +0000
  Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-15 20:51 -0500
    Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast lb <lb2048@pobox.com.delete> - 2012-01-16 03:08 +0000
      Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-15 22:39 -0500
        Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2012-01-16 08:42 +0100
          Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Curtis Dyer <dyer85@gmail.com> - 2012-01-16 09:04 +0000
          Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-16 08:25 -0500
            Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-16 19:51 +0100
      Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-16 13:28 +0000
        Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-16 08:45 -0500
          Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2012-01-17 06:59 +0100
            Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2012-01-17 07:00 +0100
              Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-17 08:17 -0500
            Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-17 08:16 -0500
              Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2012-01-19 13:36 +0100
                Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Arno Welzel <usenet@arnowelzel.de> - 2012-01-19 13:39 +0100
                Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-19 09:06 -0500
                Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-19 09:05 -0500
                Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2012-01-19 15:01 +0000
                Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast Jerry Stuckle <jstucklex@attglobal.net> - 2012-01-19 14:41 -0500
  Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast "M. Strobel" <sorry_no_mail_here@nowhere.dee> - 2012-01-16 09:49 +0100
  Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast "Álvaro G. Vicario" <alvaro.NOSPAMTHANX@demogracia.com.invalid> - 2012-01-16 11:48 +0100
    Re: Implied cast differs from explicit cast lb <lb2048@pobox.com.delete> - 2012-01-17 02:35 +0000

csiph-web