Yes.Originally Posted by MK27
I didn't think it would. But having had my attention drawn to this line of code that (I believe) theoretically could overflow aren't I better off doing something about it?But as for checking the value with your ternary operation, that will not matter to the compiler* one way or the other.
If the code would actually 'peg' at 256 instead of wrapping round then that's a different matter, but C doesn't do that, does it?
I don't *think* you can cause an overflow with arithmetic, the values just wrap around.
If you aren't sure that an error can't happen, then you definitely need to account for that in your programming. Probably getting scolded about type mismatches is enough to create a (pavlovian*)response eventually, and maybe just adding the cast will get you to think about the implications, so it's all good. I use gcc -Wall and I have never seen a compiler warning that could not be dealt with; they are not irrational and thank the gods for them.
As long as you understand that it's adding the cast, and not the error check, that cues it.
C programming resources:
GNU C Function and Macro Index -- glibc reference manual
The C Book -- nice online learner guide
Current ISO draft standard
CCAN -- new CPAN like open source library repository
3 (different) GNU debugger tutorials: #1 -- #2 -- #3
cpwiki -- our wiki on sourceforge
