Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!haven!mimsy!chris
From: chris@mimsy.umd.edu (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Parameter Types in Old-Style Function Definitions
Keywords: parameter, function
Message-ID: <26564@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 15 Sep 90 13:58:01 GMT
References: <10391@pt.cs.cmu.edu> <2689@dataio.Data-IO.COM> <1990Sep15.011126.23112@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 17

In article <1990Sep15.011126.23112@jarvis.csri.toronto.edu>
hugh@dgp.toronto.edu (D. Hugh Redelmeier) writes:
>The fact that the default argument promotions are implementation
>dependant is quite unfortunate.

Indeed.

Note that this problem would not exist, had X3J11 chosen the correct
(i.e., sign-preserving) extension rules.  As things stand now, you
CANNOT calculate the type of an unsigned expression in a widening
context.  Apparently the committee decided that the value represented
by some bit pattern was more important than the type needed to hold
that value---not minding the fact that without knowing that type, it
is not possible to describe that value!
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 405 2750)
Domain:	chris@cs.umd.edu	Path:	uunet!mimsy!chris