Bernd Trog wrote:
Is the handling of the value -32768 optimized in any way, while
-32769 and -32767 are not optimized in the same way?
No, see below
For interest, why do you ask?
I'm chasing a bug that only appeares when Standard.Integer'Size is 16:
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26849
Trying to make the compiler work with standard integer size of
16 will be very difficult I fear. It really assumes an integer
size of at least 32 I would guess, though of course type Uint
does not depend on the format of Integer.
FOr a discussion of the representation of Uint, see the private
part of Uintp.
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com
