🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Dec11.173855.19517@crd.ge.com> volpe@ausable.crd.ge.com writes:
>Section 3.3 says "These [bitwise] operators return values that depend on the
>internal representations of integers, and thus have implementation defined
>aspects for signed types."

Yeah, this means that even when the operation succeeds, the resulting VALUE
still has implementation defined aspects.  It doesn't say anything about
failed operations.

>The standard makes an explicit statement showing a qualitative difference
>between bitwise operators and non-bitwise operators,

Yes.

>indicating that bitwise operators operate in "representation-space" while
>other operators operate in "math-space". 

I don't think the standard says this so clearly.  We can't even rely on the
base document to answer this, because in pre-standard days of a substitute
assembly language, I think ALL operators were regarded as operating in
representation-space.  If you think the standard maintained the old concept
in a fragment of C's operations, I think you have to ask for an interpretation
ruling.
--
Norman Diamond       diamond@jit081.enet.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.
"It's been a lovely recession."