Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > Vincent Lefevre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: | > | > | On 2007-01-16 13:41:16 -0800, Ian Lance Taylor wrote: | > | > To be clear, in my opinion, this should always be selected by an | > | > option, it should never be default behaviour for any target. | > | | > | I disagree. One should get correct results by default. | > | > Once we have an implemented solution, we can quibble over whether it | > should be on by default or not. That debate will be supported by | > sample of hard data. Once we have an implementation. | | I wonder why the call to div/ldiv/lldiv says the behavior is undefined while | % is defined, that seems wrong.
That is because div also has to compute the division too (which is undefined) "%" does not. | The specific wording from the standard is "If either part of the result | cannot be represented, the behavior is undefined." So why is % different | from those functions? because "%" is not "div", syntactically and semantically. -- Gaby