From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,cd8ed9115942852f
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b92b95c9b5585075
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gid4f1905883f,gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: 
 g2news1.google.com!news4.google.com!feeder.news-service.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Why use C++?
Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 14:59:19 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID: <j240nd$7g2$1@dont-email.me>
References: <j22ddq$7pq$1@dont-email.me>
 <e42b54adb274b7447820bb6982baf6f5@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>
Injection-Date: Fri, 12 Aug 2011 19:59:42 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org;
 posting-host="MIpMIVYD9PDhsUAPC84lbA";
	logging-data="7682"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+vBkxS2n+LuEPvxlejGv81"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6109
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
Cancel-Lock: sha1:cIJiS2OVU/1Ve8atDWGKH9TN5V4=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Xref: g2news1.google.com comp.lang.c++:82890 comp.lang.ada:20582
Date: 2011-08-12T14:59:19-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


"Fritz Wuehler" <fritz@spamexpire-201108.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> 
wrote in message 
news:e42b54adb274b7447820bb6982baf6f5@msgid.frell.theremailer.net...
> "Jed" <jehdiah@orbitway.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com> wrote in message
>> news:j22c61$5lo$1@munin.nbi.dk...
>>
>> > Modular types are something altogether different (and in all 
>> > honesty,
>> > rare enough that direct language support is of dubious value -- most 
>> > of
>> > us supported adding them to Ada 95 simply because it was the only 
>> > way
>> > to get any support for the largest unsigned integer type).
>> >
>>
>> Isn't the wrapping behavior just a consequence of wanting to get a
>> representation in which signed and unsigned integers can be easily
>> converted to each other? I.e., "they" didn't sit down and say, "let's
>> implement unsigned integers with wrapping behavior".
>
> More likely it's a consequence of doing nothing, because the natural
> behavior of the hardware is that unsigned integers wrap. Unless there 
> was a
> specific language feature designed to prevent this, that is how it will 
> work
> on most platforms.
>

Ah ha! Confirmation comes. I hypothesized similar, further up in the 
thread.