gcc interprets -0 incorrectly

[Gaute B Strokkenes]

On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, segher@koffie.nl wrote:
> Justin Pryzby wrote:
>> 
>>  * From algebra: it is clear that for all x=-x, 2x=0, x=0.
> 
> x=0 is not implied by 2x=0 in this ring (the ring of integers
> modulo some power of two); this ring is not an integral domain,
> and 2 is a zero divisor.
> 
> -MIN_INT == MIN_INT  is perfectly fine, mathematically.

OTOH a lot of interesting theory only applies when 2 != 0;
specifically because the ability to divide by 2 turns out to be
particularly useful.

One of my lecturers when I was a maths undergraduate once said that
some people liked to do stuff in fields with characteristic 2 as a
kind of special spice; but that people who wish to remain sane should
stay away from them...

-- 
Gaute Strokkenes                        http://www.srcf.ucam.org/~gs234/
A KAISER ROLL?!  What good is a Kaiser Roll without a little
 COLE SLAW on the SIDE?