> I am pretty sure that C refuses to define signed overflow and left
> shift of negative numbers because it does not want to accept "2's
> complement" as de facto standard.
Yes, this part of the C standard predates the dominance of two's
complement arithmetic.
> FreeType also pretends to be uncommitted to "2's complement", see
> ftcalc.c:529 for example.
I don't think so. It's rather that FreeType *only* works with two's
complement arithmetic.
> Strangely, these new macros essentially accept "2's complement" as
> the only true God and as a FreeType requirement.
Yes. Support for one's complement arithmetic is not supported since
the transition from FreeType 1 to FreeType 2.
Werner
_______________________________________________
Freetype-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/freetype-devel
