On 07.10.2014 11:20, Kustaa Nyholm wrote: > A thought: > > Over the years I've come across both defaults in various compilers, > I wonder if we/you could easily find out what is the common > default in the compilers that support the same set of processors > as SDCC...maybe that would give a hint on what to do. > > Personally I think it is a bug if a code depends on the > signed/unsignedness of char as the C standard leaves that > open ... then again in 8-bit processors you are always short > of space and execution power so you use 'char' and > it is easy to write: > > char i; > for (i=99; i>=0; i--) > ....
That's why you use signed char or int_fast8_t or int_least8_t instead of char for that loop counter. Philipp
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Meet PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance Requirements with EventLog Analyzer Achieve PCI DSS 3.0 Compliant Status with Out-of-the-box PCI DSS Reports Are you Audit-Ready for PCI DSS 3.0 Compliance? Download White paper Comply to PCI DSS 3.0 Requirement 10 and 11.5 with EventLog Analyzer http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=154622311&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________ Sdcc-user mailing list Sdcc-user@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/sdcc-user
