Felipe Kellermann wrote:
> Thanks. I will look at the resulting assembly in the different toolchains
> and processos and systems and eventually discuss this subject with the GCC
> or binutils people.
I.e., suggesting that they standardize on a particular behavior for shifts
greater than the widt
On Sun, 28 May 2006 1:14pm -0700, Guy Harris wrote:
> Felipe Kellermann wrote:
>
> > This fixes the problem to me. Does anyone know why 0x << (32 - 0)
> > is resulting in 0x in mcode?
>
> To quote the ANSI C89 standard, section 3.3.7 "Bitwise Shift Operators":
>
> If the va
Felipe Kellermann wrote:
> This fixes the problem to me. Does anyone know why 0x << (32 - 0)
> is resulting in 0x in mcode?
To quote the ANSI C89 standard, section 3.3.7 "Bitwise Shift Operators":
If the value of the right operand is negative or is greater than or
equal to th
