Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!paperboy!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: towards a faster isdigit()
Message-ID: <16104@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 10 May 91 22:33:16 GMT
References: <1991May8.030515.7004@twinsun.com> <1991May8.154453.4462@intellistor.com>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 14

In article <1991May8.154453.4462@intellistor.com> wicklund@intellistor.com (Tom Wicklund) writes:
>1)  Numeric digits aren't adjacent character codes in all character
>sets (though I can't think of an example where this isn't true off
>hand).

Oh, yes they are, at least in terms of the C source character set,
because that is a requirement the standard imposes on a conforming
implementation.  (I argues and voted against that, by the way.)

>2) The (unsigned) cast may not work (I think an implementation could
>return abs(x) as the result of an (unsigned) cast but am not sure),

Type conversions are carefully specified in the C standard; what you
describe is not allowed in a conforming implementation.