From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jun 2 01:31:13 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA07320 for hackers-outgoing; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 01:31:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au [129.127.96.120]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA07310 for ; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 01:31:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: (from msmith@localhost) by genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au (8.8.5/8.7.3) id SAA21068; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 18:00:55 +0930 (CST) From: Michael Smith Message-Id: <199706020830.SAA21068@genesis.atrad.adelaide.edu.au> Subject: Re: signed/unsigned cpp In-Reply-To: from Steve Howe at "Jun 1, 97 11:55:29 pm" To: un_x@anchorage.net (Steve Howe) Date: Mon, 2 Jun 1997 18:00:55 +0930 (CST) Cc: mellon@pobox.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL28 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk Steve Howe stands accused of saying: > > > The type `char' is always a distinct type from each of `signed > > char' or `unsigned char', even though its behavior is always just > > like one of those two. > > ok, but why? i'm trying to understand any possible reason for this, > and can't think of any ... (my teachers used to hate me :) > i've written assemblers and mini-compilers and have some > understanding of what's necessary, but i don't get this! > what's is the point of this rule? as it says, > "its behaviour is always just like on of those two" ... ... because it is not possible to tell _which_one_ of the two it will be like in all cases. -- ]] Mike Smith, Software Engineer msmith@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] Genesis Software genesis@gsoft.com.au [[ ]] High-speed data acquisition and (GSM mobile) 0411-222-496 [[ ]] realtime instrument control. (ph) +61-8-8267-3493 [[ ]] Unix hardware collector. "Where are your PEZ?" The Tick [[