From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1114
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Rich Felker <dalias@aerifal.cx>
Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general
Subject: Re: FreeSec crypt()
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 10:56:03 -0400
Message-ID: <20120613145603.GD163@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
References: <20120612235113.GA21296@openwall.com>
 <20120613011842.GA163@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20120613061032.GH17860@port70.net>
 <20120613125839.GB163@brightrain.aerifal.cx>
 <20120613131807.GA22380@openwall.com>
Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1339599634 1875 80.91.229.3 (13 Jun 2012 15:00:34 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 15:00:34 +0000 (UTC)
To: musl@lists.openwall.com
Original-X-From: musl-return-1115-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Wed Jun 13 17:00:31 2012
Return-path: <musl-return-1115-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>
Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org
Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200])
	by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69)
	(envelope-from <musl-return-1115-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com>)
	id 1Sep3c-0007FR-1L
	for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 17:00:28 +0200
Original-Received: (qmail 15907 invoked by uid 550); 13 Jun 2012 15:00:28 -0000
Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:musl@lists.openwall.com>
List-Help: <mailto:musl-help@lists.openwall.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:musl-unsubscribe@lists.openwall.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:musl-subscribe@lists.openwall.com>
Original-Received: (qmail 15899 invoked from network); 13 Jun 2012 15:00:27 -0000
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20120613131807.GA22380@openwall.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1114
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1114>

On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 05:18:07PM +0400, Solar Designer wrote:
> > Note that even if the behavior were defined, this code seems to have
> > different behavior for high bytes depending on the signedness of char.
> 
> Do you mean high bits (not bytes)?

"High bytes" is a poorly defined term I used to mean bytes with their
high bit set, or bytes outside the ASCII range, etc.

> Why would signedness of char matter
> if the behavior of the signed char overflowing left shift were defined?

Well if char is signed, (char)0x80 << 1 is -256. If char is unsigned,
(char)0x80 << 1 is 256.

Rich