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

Groups > comp.std.c > #6128

Re: Problem with ranks

Show all headers | View raw

Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> writes:

> Assume an implementation with 2 extended integer types as follows :
>
> - INT1 is signed , has 23 value bits and no corresponding unsigned type.
> - UINT1 is unsigned , has 40 value bits and no corresponding signed type.
> - Both have rank greater than  int .
> - The rank of UINT1 is smaller than the rank of INT1 .

Neither of these types is allowed.  Except for _Bool, all integer
types have a corresponding type of opposite signedness.

> The last stipulation is perverse but I don't see anything in "6.3.1.1
> Boolean, characters, and integers" which forbids it.

In reading the C standard it's important to read widely.  In
this case the provisions you're missing may be found in
section 6.2.5 paragraphs 4 through 9.

Back to comp.std.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Problem with ranks Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2020-05-30 01:55 +0000
  Re: Problem with ranks James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-05-30 02:48 -0400
    Re: Problem with ranks Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-05-30 02:18 -0700
      Re: Problem with ranks jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu - 2020-05-30 07:11 -0700
        Re: Problem with ranks Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-06-28 05:54 -0700
    Re: Problem with ranks James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-05-30 09:04 -0400
  Re: Problem with ranks Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-05-30 02:11 -0700

csiph-web