On 07.10.2014 18:09, Richard Gray wrote: > If I can stick my oar in here... doesn't this make the "unsigned" > directive a bit redundant? If one expected 'C' to be a signed char as > in ANSI C, one would use the 'unsigned' directive in the code. There > is no 'signed' directive as far as I know?
There is. > This would also cause code > that works today to break tomorrow. Reading Messrs Kernighan & Ritchie > definitive tome on ANSI C, char is signed, and is assumed to be in > various library routines as well. > > I agree that there are some efficiency questions; but I'd sooner have > the standard followed and pragmas or compiler switches to invoke > non-standard behaviour. The standard (ISO C99 and ISO C11 state this explicitly in section 6.2.5, but it is the same for ANSI C89, ISO C90 and ISO C95) requires: "The implementation shall define char to have the same range, representation, and behavior as either signed char or unsigned char." So, making char unsigned by default is allowed by the standard. 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
