home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.rmii.com!usenet
- From: jcoffin@rmii.com (Jerry Coffin)
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c
- Subject: Re: int's and zero
- Date: Wed, 10 Jan 1996 20:16:06 GMT
- Organization: TAEUS
- Message-ID: <4d12qv$fir@natasha.rmii.com>
- References: <4cth4e$4q@odin.funcom.no> <4cub1a$jbl@alterdial.UU.NET>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: slip8167.rmii.com
- X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
-
- rex@aussie.com wrote:
-
- >There was considerable debate about whether or not integers could be stored
- >as BCD, Grey code, or some such, but in the end, we decided that they had to
- >be stored as binary numbers. And, of course, 2's comp, 1's comp, and signed
- >magnitude all use all-bits-zero for zero. The only thing that could cause a
- >problem is for machines/compilers with signed zeros; I think that negative
- >zero might have some other bit pattern.
-
- Yes -- in one's complement, `-0' is represented with all bits set to 1.
- With one's complement, the usual method of testing for 0 is something
- like: `if (x+0 == 0)' since the addition of 0 normally produces a
- positive 0. If memory serves some of the more widely used one's
- complement machines (e.g. CDC 6000/7000/Cyber's) had a pseudo-register
- set to a constant value of 0 that came in handy for this.
- (Unfortunately, they also used 6 bit characters, so a conforming
- implementation of C would have been quite difficult anyway...)
- Later,
- Jerry.
-
- /* I can barely express my own opinions; I certainly can't
- * express anybody else's.
- *
- * The universe is a figment of its own imagination.
- */
-
-