Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Underlying Types
#3
MISRA Reply Wrote:4. Otherwise, both operands are converted to the underlying unsigned type corresponding to the type of the operand with the underlying signed type.

Sounds "fine and dandy" to me, but what about an 'signed char + unsigned int'? Item 4 would then convert both operands "to the underlying unsigned type" {making the expression some 'unsigned' thing} "corresponding to the type of the operand with the underlying signed type" {making the expression some 'char' thing}, making the expression 'unsigned char'. Do I have that correct? Should that *be* correct?


Messages In This Thread

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)