On Sat, 18 Dec 2021 15:07:30 -0500 Ethan Sommer <e5ten.a...@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Ethan, > > (size_t)-1 is also undefined behaviour. > > It isn't, wrap-around with unsigned types is defined, it's only signed > overflow that isn't. yes, exactly. For posterity, the standard specifies that in 6.3.1.3p2: "Otherwise, if the new type is unsigned, the value is converted by repeatedly adding or subtracting one more than the maximum value that can be represented in the new type until the value is in the range of the new type." With best regards Laslo
