Michael Veksler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | Gabriel Dos Reis wrote on 28/06/2005 17:12:43: | | > Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > | On Jun 28, 2005, at 9:58 AM, Gabriel Dos Reis wrote: | > | | > | > Notice that in your rendition you're assuming that you can convert | any | > | > unsigned value > INT_MAX to a int without invoking undefined | behaviour. | > | | > | | > | | > | If you read Nathan's mail correctly, the cast is implementation defined | > | and not undefined behavior so your argument does not work. | > | > I stand corrected! | > | | So what does gcc gives for (int) (MAX_INT+1U)?
It should give you INT_MIN. At least numeric_limits<int>::min is implemented that way (suggested by RTH). | This behavior seems to be undocumented (a documentation PR?). Yes, we should document this. In general, implementation defined aspects (and some of the undefined behaviour aspects) are missing documentation for C++ -- JSM did some work for that for C. -- Gaby
