Re: warning: right shift count >= width of type

[Dale Johannesen <dalej at apple dot com>]

On Nov 29, 2004, at 10:51 AM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> >   I myself would want "(n >> 32)" to produce the same result as "((n 
> > >> 16)
> > > > 16)" and indeed "for (int i = 32; i > 0; i--, n >>= 1) ;", and it 
> > > > seems
> > to be generally agreed that the compiler would be at liberty to so do 
> > if it
> > wants to.
>
> But you could never depend on it.  If it only works when the shift
> count is a constant, a failure to do constant folding would break it.

Or constant propagation, or inlining, or ...