Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: unsigned int |
| Date | 2016-08-01 10:15 -0400 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <nnnlif$sqs$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <unsigned-20160731163521@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <e06rglFmcd5U1@mid.individual.net> <nnn35u$2dd$1@dont-email.me> |
On 08/01/2016 05:01 AM, David Brown wrote: > On 31/07/16 19:40, Osmium wrote: > >> >> A novice would naturally think that char was signed by default, the same >> as an int. It is not, the default is chosen by the compiler writer. >> Among other things, this has ramifications in bit shifting within >> characters,. > > A novice may equally well think that a char was /unsigned/ by default, > since the obvious interpretation of "char" is "character", such as > letters, digits, etc. - and the concept of a "negative character" is > totally meaningless. Contrasting those two statements helps explain why implementations where char was signed and ones where it was unsigned have co-existed since long before the language was first standardized. That, in turn, explains why the standard permits both possibilities.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: unsigned int "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2016-07-31 12:40 -0500
Re: unsigned int David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-01 11:01 +0200
Re: unsigned int James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-08-01 10:15 -0400
Re: unsigned int Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-08-01 09:59 -0500
Re: unsigned int David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-01 17:21 +0200
Re: unsigned int Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-01 09:55 -0700
Re: unsigned int David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-01 22:42 +0200
Re: unsigned int supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-08-01 14:18 -0700
Re: unsigned int Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-08-01 13:11 -0500
Re: unsigned int Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-08-01 19:46 +0100
Re: unsigned int Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-08-01 18:20 -0500
Re: unsigned int David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-02 10:18 +0200
Re: unsigned int Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-08-02 09:35 -0500
Re: unsigned int Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-02 08:00 -0700
Re: unsigned int Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-08-02 11:12 -0500
Re: unsigned int David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-02 17:11 +0200
Re: unsigned int Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2016-08-02 11:55 -0500
Re: unsigned int supercat@casperkitty.com - 2016-08-02 10:16 -0700
Re: unsigned int David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-03 14:02 +0200
Re: unsigned int Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-03 08:58 -0700
Re: unsigned int James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2016-08-02 13:57 -0400
Re: unsigned int Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2016-08-02 19:30 +0100
Re: unsigned int Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-02 11:38 -0700
Re: unsigned int David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-03 14:12 +0200
Re: unsigned int David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-03 13:45 +0200
Re: unsigned int Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2016-08-01 12:02 -0700
Re: unsigned int David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2016-08-01 23:01 +0200
csiph-web