Reputation: 13
When I do a left shift of a hex I get -1 as output with the following code:
unsigned int i,j=0;
i= (0xffffffff << (32-j));
printf("%d",i);
Similarly when I changed the shift value to 32, the output is 0, but I get warnings from compiler as (left shift count >= width of type)
unsigned int i,j=32;
i= (0xffffffff << (32));
printf("%d",i);
I was expecting the same results in both the cases (ie, 0), but got confused why is displaying wrong output in case #1, and in case #2 the result is correct but the compiler warns!
The result is same in 32 and 64 bit x86 machines.
Can someone explain the results above?
Upvotes: 1
Views: 270
Reputation: 30136
Shifting a 32-bit variable by 32 yields undefined behavior.
Here is the assembly generated by the VS-2013 compiler:
int n = 0;
mov dword ptr [n],0
int a = 0xFFFFFFFF << 32;
mov dword ptr [a],0
int b = 0xFFFFFFFF << (32-n);
mov ecx,20h
sub ecx,dword ptr [n]
or eax,0FFFFFFFFh
shl eax,cl
mov dword ptr [b],eax
As you can see, what happens de-facto is:
32-n
with n==0
), the compiler uses shl
The actual result of shl
depends on the implementation of this operation in the underlying architecture. On your processor, it probably takes the 2nd operand modulo 32, hence the 1st operand is shifted by 0.
Again, the description above is not dictated by the standard, so it really depends on the compiler in use.
Upvotes: 2
Reputation: 122403
It's undefined behavior to left-shit 32
or greater on a 32-bit integer. That's what the error is about.
C11 6.5.7 Bitwise shift operators
The integer promotions are performed on each of the operands. The type of the result is that of the promoted left operand. If the value of the right operand is negative or is greater than or equal to the width of the promoted left operand, the behavior is undefined.
Upvotes: 2