Re: Quick check on signed promotion of bytes
- From: toe@xxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 02:54:45 -0800 (PST)
On Jan 31, 10:48 am, vipps...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
1) x is promoted to signed int.
That won't happend, therefore the rest of your thoughts is false.
Your code is perfectly valid.
My understanding was as follows:
"If you're dealing with an integer type smaller than int, then it
must undergo promotion before you can perform any operations on it."
--
Tomás Ó hÉilidhe
.
- References:
- Quick check on signed promotion of bytes
- From: toe
- Re: Quick check on signed promotion of bytes
- From: vippstar
- Quick check on signed promotion of bytes
- Prev by Date: Re: Quick check on signed promotion of bytes
- Next by Date: Re: A solution for the allocation failures problem
- Previous by thread: Re: Quick check on signed promotion of bytes
- Next by thread: Re: Quick check on signed promotion of bytes
- Index(es):