From:	Endlisnis <s257m AT unb DOT ca>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: Infinite loop???
Date:	Sat, 11 Jul 1998 13:37:00 -0300
Organization:	University of New Brunswick
Lines:	16
Message-ID:	<Pine.SOL.3.96.980711133217.25617C-100000@sol.sun.csd.unb.ca>
References:	<35A3D8C3 DOT 208E6D23 AT cyberdude DOT com> <35A5FC72 DOT C235F6D9 AT eik DOT bme DOT hu><VqrTZAA4qlp1Ew16 AT foobar DOT co DOT uk> <TLOCBFAvt0p1EwGO AT foobar DOT co DOT uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	sol-alt1.unb.ca
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<TLOCBFAvt0p1EwGO@foobar.co.uk>
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp

On Sat, 11 Jul 1998, Paul Shirley wrote:
->>>I think these differ in how they uses the CARRY bit
->
->(Having realised << is a left shift;)
->The reason you see SAL or SHL is that they are the same instruction,
->given 2 names at the whim of some Intel engineer, used at the whim of
->the compiler writers.
->The carry (if that were the difference) would be irrelevant since C
->source cannot see a carry, compiler writers can do what they like with
->it.
	Wouldn't that mean that if you had a negative number shifted left
a bunch of times you could end up with a positive?

	Endlisnis
[I have a pyramid of wingyness]

- Raw text -