Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 14:43:26 -0700 From: Mike Hunter <mhunter@ack.Berkeley.EDU> To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>, "Jacques A. Vidrine" <nectar@FreeBSD.org>, hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: incorrect enum warning? Message-ID: <20030501214326.GA10277@ack.Berkeley.EDU> In-Reply-To: <20030501213418.GA42794@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> References: <xzp7k9a67pf.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20030501150713.GA34992@madman.celabo.org> <20030501152022.GC568@wombat.fafoe> <xzpr87ipefn.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20030501213418.GA42794@falcon.midgard.homeip.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On May 01, "Erik Trulsson" wrote:
> On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 11:03:40PM +0200, Dag-Erling Smorgrav wrote:
> > Stefan Farfeleder <stefan@fafoe.dyndns.org> writes:
> > > Because 0x80000000 > INT_MAX on 32-Bit architectures, 0x80000000 has
> > > type unsigned. But enumeration constants always have type int, that's
> > > why you're getting this warning.
> >
> > but 0x80000000 == INT_MIN on 32-bit two's complement systems...
>
> No. 0x80000000 has type unsigned int (assuming 32-bit int) and is thus
> a large positive number. INT_MIN has type signed int and is a negative
> number. The fact that they happen to have the same representation does
> not mean they are the same thing.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <limits.h>
int main ()
{
printf("%d\n", (0x80000000 == INT_MIN));
return 0;
}
./a.out
1
Just pointing out that they do "==" each other, which is what was said.
Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030501214326.GA10277>