This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
[Bug libstdc++/22200] numeric_limits<signed>::is_modulo is inconsistend with gcc
- From: "gdr at integrable-solutions dot net" <gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- To: gcc-bugs at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 27 Jun 2005 18:46:48 -0000
- Subject: [Bug libstdc++/22200] numeric_limits<signed>::is_modulo is inconsistend with gcc
- References: <20050627151911.22200.veksler@il.ibm.com>
- Reply-to: gcc-bugzilla at gcc dot gnu dot org
------- Additional Comments From gdr at integrable-solutions dot net 2005-06-27 18:46 -------
Subject: Re: numeric_limits<signed>::is_modulo is inconsistend with gcc
"pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc-bugzilla@gcc.gnu.org> writes:
| ------- Additional Comments From pinskia at gcc dot gnu dot org 2005-06-27 18:34 -------
| (In reply to comment #16)
| > Thanks, I'm the author of <limits>. For all useful purposes, please
| > Andrew go back and read the link I gave to RTH's message.
|
| Yes and RTH's comment about trapping is wrong, because PPC does not trap at all. See PR 22203 for
| that bug.
You seem to confuse all issues. Please be careful in trying issues.
The fact that you assert that integers don't trap does not make RTH's
comment wrong. Furtheremore, are you claiming that
1 / 0
does not trap on PPC? (I do not have a PPC to check). If that is
true, you're welcoome to submit a patch to rectify the value for PPC.
-- Gaby
--
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=22200