This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Do C++ signed types have modulo semantics?
On Tuesday 28 June 2005 14:16, Paul Koning wrote:
> >>>>> "Steven" == Steven Bosscher <stevenb@suse.de> writes:
>
> Steven> Indeed. Frankly this "seems likely" guess confuses me. It
> Steven> is already well known that using unsigned types for loop
> Steven> counters may greatly improve the code gcc can generate for
> Steven> loops. With wrap-around semantics, suddenly countable loops
> Steven> are turned into noncountable loops, overflow can occur,
> Steven> dependencies may be introduced that never happen in reality,
> Steven> and so on.
>
> I must be missing something.
Yes.
> Unsigned has wraparound (modulo)
> semantics.
The whole point is that it doesn't.
Gr.
Steven