On a sign-magnitude C implementation, ~~INT_MAX==INT_MIN. In particular, ~~ is not the identity.
-
-
Replying to @RichFelker
.
@RichFelker "on a sign-magnitude C impl" did there ever exist any h/w, ever, that used sign-magnitude for machine integers & could run C?2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bofh453
The existence of wacky requirements like the above is basically proof that none exist. No one would have gotten this right.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @johnregehr @bofh453
~ is defined bitwise, so ~INT_MAX is "negative 0". But 6.2.6.1¶8 requires all operators to behave same on 0 and "-0".
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @johnregehr @bofh453
Again, I take this as proof that nobody has ever made a (valid) sign-magnitude C implementation.
10:39 PM - 1 Nov 2016
0 replies
0 retweets
2 likes
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.