Re: modulo encrypt problem
From: john blackburn (john.blackburnNOSPAMPLS_at_lintonhealy.co.uk)
Date: 10/19/04
- Next message: Daniel Vallstrom: "Re: Floating-point bit hacking: iterated nextafter() without loop?"
- Previous message: James Kuyper: "Re: contiguity of arrays"
- Maybe in reply to: john blackburn: "modulo encrypt problem"
- Next in thread: bd: "Re: modulo encrypt problem"
- Reply: bd: "Re: modulo encrypt problem"
- Reply: Eric Sosman: "Re: modulo encrypt problem"
- Reply: Flash Gordon: "Re: modulo encrypt problem"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2004 14:43:11 +0100
osmium wrote:
> I didn't try to analyze that. But be aware that the default for char
> "signage" is undefined in the standard; it can be either signed or
> unsigned,
> it is a vendor option. So if you are using char type anywhere in your
> program be sure to explicitly specify it as unsigned.
In the main header file it states :-
#define unsigned char UNSIGNED8
- Next message: Daniel Vallstrom: "Re: Floating-point bit hacking: iterated nextafter() without loop?"
- Previous message: James Kuyper: "Re: contiguity of arrays"
- Maybe in reply to: john blackburn: "modulo encrypt problem"
- Next in thread: bd: "Re: modulo encrypt problem"
- Reply: bd: "Re: modulo encrypt problem"
- Reply: Eric Sosman: "Re: modulo encrypt problem"
- Reply: Flash Gordon: "Re: modulo encrypt problem"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]