Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!ll-xn!ames!umd5!trantor.umd.edu!chris
From: chris@trantor.umd.edu (Chris Torek)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Unsigned considerations
Message-ID: <2263@umd5.umd.edu>
Date: 8 Feb 88 11:02:56 GMT
References: <3373@bobkat.UUCP> <1988Feb7.000253.465@utzoo.uucp>
Sender: ris@umd5.umd.edu
Reply-To: chris@gyre.umd.edu (Chris Torek)
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Lines: 20

Speaking of unsigned conversions, unless it has changed recently (which
I doubt), the dpANS says that given

	unsigned short u;

	... <expression involving u> ...

the type of that part of the expression may be either `int' (signed)
or `unsigned int' (unsigned) depending on the relative ranges of
`int' and `unsigned short'.  The expression will be of type `int'
if all unsigned short values (e.g., 0..65535) can be fit into a
signed integer (e.g., on a VAX).  The expression will be `unsigned
int' if an integer cannot hold values in 0..65535 (e.g., on a
PDP-11).

This is *not* what is done by current PCC variants, and seems to
me a horrible misfeature.
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Computer Science, +1 301 454 7163
(hiding out on trantor.umd.edu until mimsy is reassembled in its new home)
Domain: chris@mimsy.umd.edu		Path: not easily reachable