From: aschwarz@acm.org (skidmarks)
Subject: Re: Signed vs Natural/32-bits vs 31 bits
Date: 27 Oct 2004 08:35:00 -0700
Date: 2004-10-27T08:35:00-07:00 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <35f054ea.0410270735.7892ff30@posting.google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: Vhffd.2316$kM.2106@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net
David Hoos in a private communication indicated that the least
significant bit was (indeed) deleted. What is confusing about this
dialog is that I thought that 'Unchecked_Conversion' meant that all
bits were used and the bits were converted to the 'new' type. Under
this impression, my thought was that I'd have a 32-bit Natural number.
What I seem to be told is that that is not accurate and that
'Unchecked_Conversion' takes less liberties than I'd hoped. Any idea
why?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2004-10-27 15:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2004-10-25 15:43 Signed vs Natural/32-bits vs 31 bits skidmarks
2004-10-25 19:57 ` Mark H Johnson
2004-10-25 22:40 ` Jeffrey Carter
2004-10-27 15:35 ` skidmarks [this message]
2004-10-27 16:25 ` David C. Hoos
2004-10-28 7:53 ` Martin Krischik
2004-10-29 17:14 ` skidmarks
replies disabled
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox