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.