[boost] Re: Re: (boost) Re: A pure C/C++ question

From: Hillel Y. Sims (hsims_at_[hidden])
Date: 2002-08-28 16:06:37

"Anthony Williams" <anthwil_at_[hidden]> wrote in message
news:15724.54059.170000.323915_at_gargle.gargle.HOWL...
> David Bergman writes:
[..]
> The type of the subexpression is still int, since types are a static
property
> of expressions at compile time. However, on overflow the results are
> undefined, so there are no longer any restrictions on behaviour, and the
> values are permitted to be outside the normally-representable range.
[..]
>
>  > Anyhow, we all know that there is nothing to be derived from our
>  > "bible", The International Standard, in these cases, which makes these
>  > discussions not only out-of-bounds w.r.t the Boost library, but also
>  > metaphysical if we believe C++ to be the reality.

It's kind of like quantum physics... it can potentially be of any fuzzy type
you need if you don't look directly at it... <cue spooky music>

> This discussion is really getting quite pointless, especially since both
MSVC
> and g++ generate imul/cdq/idiv (or equivalent) on x86, rather than keeping
the
> extra precision at the intermediate step.

...or maybe not! Doh!

hys

--
Hillel Y. Sims
FactSet Research Systems
hsims AT factset.com