Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Constraints on UINT_MAX (was Re: # to the nth power)
Message-ID: <14467@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 15 Nov 90 18:57:18 GMT
References: <ENAG.90Nov3145415@hild.ifi.uio.no> <14379@smoke.brl.mil> <954@mwtech.UUCP>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 12

In article <954@mwtech.UUCP> martin@mwtech.UUCP (Martin Weitzel) writes:
>It would seem logical to me that the `pure binary representation' also
>enforces that UINT_MAX is allways one less than a power of two, ...

I think that could be concluded from the various constraints etc., but
it would be useful to get an official interpretation ruling on this.

>..., which would make `(unsigned) exponent & 1' a working
>substitute for `exponent % 2' for all values of exponent.

True, although that's relying on implementors to get it right, which
on a one's complement architecture requires extra code generation.