Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

[...]

You made a statement, "gcc disagrees with you". I demonstrated,
in text that you snipped, that gcc does in fact agree with me.

No, you didn't.

Yes, I did.

You were wrong.

No, I wasn't. Your testing was faulty.

Yes, you were. My testing was not faulty.

Oddly enough, your response reminds me of an observation
reportedly attributed to Leonaro da Vinci.

~ $ cd demo
~/demo $ /bin/ls
ce.c
~/demo $ cat ce.c
#include <limits.h>

int
main(){
switch(1){
case (INT_MAX+1)*0: return 1;
default: return 0;
}
}
~/demo $ gcc -std=c99 -pedantic-errors -Wno-overflow -o gcc-ce ce.c
~/demo $ clang -std=c99 -pedantic-errors -Wno-integer-overflow -o clang-ce ce.c ~/demo $ /bin/ls
ce.c clang-ce gcc-ce
~/demo $ ./gcc-ce
~/demo $ echo $?
0
~/demo $ ./clang-ce
~/demo $ echo $?
0
~/demo $

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
[...]

The text of the standard explicitly carves this out; or, rather,
it attempts to. If the result of an expression is not
representable in the target type, _regardless of whether that's
due to UB or not_, a diagnostic is required.

[...]

How would an expression (appearing in a context that requires an
integer constant expression) not "evaluate to a constant that is in
the range of representable values for its type" other than by UB?

I can think of one.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
[...]

The text of the standard explicitly carves this out; or, rather,
it attempts to. If the result of an expression is not
representable in the target type, _regardless of whether that's
due to UB or not_, a diagnostic is required.

[...]

How would an expression (appearing in a context that requires an
integer constant expression) not "evaluate to a constant that is in
the range of representable values for its type" other than by UB?

I can think of one.

So you've decided to be a troll.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

In article <115r09e$3qb10$1@kst.eternal-september.org>,
Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> wrote:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

cross@spitfire.i.gajendra.net (Dan Cross) writes:
[...]

The text of the standard explicitly carves this out; or, rather,
it attempts to. If the result of an expression is not
representable in the target type, _regardless of whether that's
due to UB or not_, a diagnostic is required.

[...]

How would an expression (appearing in a context that requires an
integer constant expression) not "evaluate to a constant that is in
the range of representable values for its type" other than by UB?

I can think of one.

So you've decided to be a troll.

I think it's been that way for a while, sadly.

His MO seems to be to make a claim, be shown to be wrong,
disappear for an extended stretch, and then reappear with a
non-response.

- Dan C.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.19
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)