Interesting bug in number size determination

[Zack Weinberg]

On Mon, 19 Apr 1999 09:49:04 +1200, "Ross Smith" wrote:
>From: Szekeres Istvan <szekeres@cyberspace.mht.bme.hu>
>
>>The other interesting thing is that 0xffffffff=4294967295 and it doesn't
>>have problems with the hex format :)
>
>The absence of the warning in this case sounds like a genuine bug to
>me, albeit a very minor one.

No.  Hexadecimal and octal constants are always unsigned.

zw