Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.sys.ibm.pc Subject: Re: What's Wrong here? Message-ID: <6761@brl-smoke.ARPA> Date: Mon, 30-Nov-87 11:08:51 EST Article-I.D.: brl-smok.6761 Posted: Mon Nov 30 11:08:51 1987 Date-Received: Thu, 3-Dec-87 04:06:20 EST References: <278@westmark.UUCP> <6755@brl-smoke.ARPA> <6855@sunybcs.UUCP> Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB)) Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD. Lines: 12 Xref: mnetor comp.lang.c:5648 comp.sys.ibm.pc:10618 In article <6855@sunybcs.UUCP> ugfailau@joey.UUCP (Fai Lau) writes: >In article <6755@brl-smoke.ARPA> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) ) writes: >That is, when the sign bit is turned on as >a result of bit shifting, it can not be turned off again, Is this REALLY true of the 80*86 family? If so, it's the only architecture I've ever heard of that behaves this way. > The operation is not undefine. By "undefined" I meant, undefined by the C language specification. Obviously the hardware will do SOMEthing.