18 Sep
2005
18 Sep
'05
00:03
On Saturday 17 September 2005 09:00, Anders Johansson wrote:
On Friday 16 September 2005 20:19, Jerry Feldman wrote:
For instance the following code fragment is standards compliant but non-portable: long n; int i = -2; unsigned k = 1; n = i + k;
sign extensions in promotions is something they really should have standardised by now. They haven't even standardised on the binary representation of negative numbers, [...]
Should a high level language be dictating to CPU manufacturers how processors must internally represents values?