9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: tlaronde@polynum.com
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Subject: Re: [9fans] BUG!!! in Plan9 compiler!
Date: Fri, 23 Apr 2010 09:42:21 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100423074221.GA861@polynum.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100422224911.F14615B73@mail.bitblocks.com>

On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 03:49:11PM -0700, Bakul Shah wrote:
> On Thu, 22 Apr 2010 23:15:51 +0200 tlaronde@polynum.com  wrote:
> > This is: signed long + signed long + unsigned char.
>
> > Do you mean that there is first promotion :
> >
> > 	1) unsigned char is promoted to unsigned int (A6.1).
>
> As per C89 in this case the unsigned char value should be
> promoted to a *signed* int value.  The sum will be of type
> signed int and so the division will do the right thing. In
> kencc case it seems the sum has type unsigned int for some
> reason and further, the signed divisor (2) is promoted to an
> unsigned int. Seems like a bug.
>
> Now that you know the problem, you can work around it by
> setting type smallnumber to a signed char (since its range is
> 0..64 this should just work with either compiler).
>
> > And when I do first assignment, there is only promotion (since no
> > operator is here).
>
> There is promotion since you did += but it doesn't matter.
> In C, a variable has a static type and you can't override
> this type by any assignment.
>
> > Yielding the correct value in x2, that is then
> > divided (or shifted) by 2, hence signed, and no problem?
>
> Yes.

OK, thanks for the clarifications---more conform to what I
expected/the way I interpreted the norm---.

You gave a very simple test case for verifying a fix.

Cheers,
--
        Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com>
                      http://www.kergis.com/
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89  250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C



  reply	other threads:[~2010-04-23  7:42 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-04-22 15:29 tlaronde
2010-04-22 17:03 ` Bakul Shah
2010-04-22 17:36   ` tlaronde
2010-04-22 17:50     ` tlaronde
2010-04-22 19:08       ` geoff
2010-04-22 19:32         ` tlaronde
2010-04-22 20:07           ` Bakul Shah
2010-04-22 21:15             ` tlaronde
2010-04-22 21:26               ` tlaronde
2010-04-22 22:49               ` Bakul Shah
2010-04-23  7:42                 ` tlaronde [this message]
2010-04-23 18:53                 ` C H Forsyth
2010-04-23 18:51                   ` tlaronde
2010-04-23 20:08                   ` Bakul Shah
2010-04-23 20:46                     ` ron minnich
2010-04-23 21:44                       ` erik quanstrom
2010-04-23 22:34                       ` erik quanstrom
2010-04-24 18:59                         ` Bakul Shah
2010-04-24 21:47                           ` Charles Forsyth
2010-04-25  0:31                           ` erik quanstrom

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20100423074221.GA861@polynum.com \
    --to=tlaronde@polynum.com \
    --cc=9fans@9fans.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).