Sender:	nate AT cartsys DOT com
Message-ID:	<365612FC.A50E3D7E@cartsys.com>
Date:	Fri, 20 Nov 1998 17:10:20 -0800
From:	Nate Eldredge <nate AT cartsys DOT com>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.05 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.0.35 i486)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: gcc: feature or bug?
References:	<Pine DOT LNX DOT 3 DOT 93 DOT 981118132720 DOT 7976C-100000 AT acp3bf>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
> 
> On Wed, 18 Nov 1998, Laszlo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Nov 17, 1998 at 04:06:16PM +0100, Hans-Bernhard Broeker wrote:
> > > > > Let's say I have a 32-bit unsigned integer, and I want to clear it's
> > > > > most significant bit. I wrote this code:
> > > > >         (x*2)/2
> >
> > [..]
> >
> > > Whatever the real answer might be: this question is really not on-topic in
> > > here. It should be carried over to the responsible newsgroup,
> >
> > Well, if it's a gcc specific bug/feature, then this list a right place
> > for the first report IMHO.
> 
> Not unless you've made sure that only DJGPP shows the suspected bug. But
> this particular behaviour can easily be reproduced on other gcc
> installations (I've just cross-checked: gcc on a DEC Alpha box shows the
> exact same behaviour).

Btw: `(x << 1) >> 1' works.
-- 

Nate Eldredge
nate AT cartsys DOT com

- Raw text -