From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Jul 13 11:11:36 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 83C9737B401
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 13 Jul 2003 11:11:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB86E43FAF
	for <freebsd-current@freebsd.org>;
	Sun, 13 Jul 2003 11:11:35 -0700 (PDT)	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Received: from localhost (warner@rover2.village.org [10.0.0.1])
	by harmony.village.org (8.12.9/8.12.3) with ESMTP id h6DIBUcF001569;
	Sun, 13 Jul 2003 12:11:31 -0600 (MDT)
	(envelope-from imp@bsdimp.com)
Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 12:11:25 -0600 (MDT)
Message-Id: <20030713.121125.54936166.imp@bsdimp.com>
To: jilles@stack.nl
From: "M. Warner Losh" <imp@bsdimp.com>
In-Reply-To: <20030713152154.GA96653@stack.nl>
References: <20030713000559.28c18be6.kabaev@mail.ru>
	<20030713044331.GA89785@crodrigues.org>
	<20030713152154.GA96653@stack.nl>
X-Mailer: Mew version 2.2 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
cc: rodrigc@crodrigues.org
cc: kabaev@mail.ru
cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: GCC 3.3.1, new warnings with <limits>
X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current
	<freebsd-current.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-current@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current>,
	<mailto:freebsd-current-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 13 Jul 2003 18:11:36 -0000

In message: <20030713152154.GA96653@stack.nl>
            Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> writes:
: The compiler moans about (T)(-1) >= 0 as well. Is the assumption that
: (unsigned type)(-1) is never zero valid?

yes.  There are no known machines where -1 == 0 for types of different
signs.  Further, the C standard says that it must behave as if it is a
two's complement machine, and I think that C++ says so too.

Warner