Article View: comp.sys.sun
Article #8748Large shifts (was: Bug in compilers)
From: Luke Kendall
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1991 20:22
Date: Thu, 27 Jun 1991 20:22
14 lines
1164 bytes
1164 bytes
Sigh. Wrong again. Yes, even in ANSI it's undefined. My problem is that I can hardly believe that this sort of semantic discontinuity can exist; and that the ANSI committee chose not to fix it. I assume it's happened because some chips (e.g. SPARC) don't internally mask the shift operand, and you want the normal case (of a shift) to not incur the overhead. Sad. (I mean, it is a pretty clean language, implicit & on arrays and functions aside). -- Luke Kendall, Senior Software Engineer. | Net: luke@research.canon.oz.au Canon Information Systems Research Australia | Phone: +61 2 805 2914 P.O. Box 313 North Ryde, NSW, Australia 2113 | Fax: +61 2 805 2929
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4146@brchh104.bnr.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!cunews!bnrgate!brchh104!brchs1!bnr.ca!rice.edu!sun-spots-requestShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!cunews!bnrgate!brchh104!brchs1!bnr.ca!rice.edu!sun-spots-request From: luke@research.canon.oz.au (Luke Kendall) Newsgroups: comp.sys.sun Subject: Large shifts (was: Bug in compilers) Keywords: No Digest Subjects during Flush Message-ID: <4146@brchh104.bnr.ca> Date: 27 Jun 91 20:22:00 GMT Sender: news@brchh104.bnr.ca Organization: Sunspots, Flush Mode Lines: 15 Approved: sun-spots@rice.edu X-Original-Date: Thu, 20 Jun 1991 03:28:24 GMT