Re: how cast works?

Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> writes:

Em 8/9/2024 5:26 PM, Keith Thompson escreveu:

Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> writes:

Em 8/9/2024 2:20 PM, David Brown escreveu:

On 09/08/2024 12:57, Thiago Adams wrote:

Em 8/8/2024 6:41 PM, Bart escreveu:

On 08/08/2024 21:34, Thiago Adams wrote:

On 08/08/2024 16:42, Keith Thompson wrote:

Thiago Adams <thiago.adams@gmail.com> writes:

On 07/08/2024 17:00, Dan Purgert wrote:

On 2024-08-07, Thiago Adams wrote:

[...]

How about floating point?

Floating point is a huge mess, and has a few variations for
encoding;
though I think most C implementations use the one from the
IEEE on 1985
(uh, IEEE754, I think?)

>
I didn't specify properly , but my question was more about floating
point registers. I think in this case they have specialized
registers.

>
Who is "they"?
>
Some CPUs have floating-point registers, some don't.  C says nothing
about registers.
>
What exactly is your question?  Is it not already answered by reading
the "Conversions" section of the C standard?
>

>
>
This part is related with the previous question about the origins
of integer promotions.
>
We don't have "char" register or signed/unsigned register. But I
believe we may have double and float registers. So float does not
need to be converted to double.
>
There is no specif question here, just trying to understand the
rationally behind the conversions rules.

>
The rules have little to do with concrete machines with registers.
>
Your initial post showed come confusion about how conversions
work. They are not performed 'in-place', any more than writing `a
+ 1` changes the value of `a`.
>
Take:
>
      int a; double x;
>
      x = (double)a;
>
The cast is implicit here but I've written it out to make it
clear. My C compiler produces intermediate code like this before
converting it to native code:
>
      push x   r64                   # r64 means float64
      fix      r64 -> i32
      pop  a   i32
>
I could choose to interprete this code just as it is. Then, in
this execution model, there are no registers at all, only a stack
that can hold data of any type.
>
The 'fix' instruction pops the double value from the stack,
converts it to int (which involves changing both the bit-pattern,
and the bit-width), and pushes it back onto the stack.
>
Registers come into it when running it directly on a real
machine. But you seem more concerned with safety and correctness
than performance, so there's probably no real need to look at
actual generated native code.
>
That'll just be confusing (especially if you follow the advice to
generate only optimised code).
>
>
>
>

This part was always clear to me:
>
"They  are not performed 'in-place', any more than writing `a + 1`
changes the value of `a`."
>
Lets take double to int.
>
In this case the bits of double needs to be reinterpreted (copied
to) int.
>
So the answer "how it works" can be
>
always/generally machine has a instruction to do this
>
or.. this is defined by the IIE ... standard as ...
>
>

It would be helpful if you made more of an effort to write clearly
here.   (We know you can do so when you want to.)  It is very
difficult to follow what you are referring to here - what is "this
case" here?  A conversion from a double to an int certainly does not
re-interpret or copy bits - like other conversions, it copies the
/value/ to the best possible extent given the limitations of the
types.

>
Everything is a bit mixed up, but I'll try to explain the part about
registers that I have in mind.

Why you keep talking about registers?  The C standard does not talk
about registers, and the promotion rules are based on which *operations*
are available, not what kinds of registers a given CPU happens to have.

>
I use "register" to talk about how hardware works.

I don't see how that makes sense.  Not all CPUs have registers.  For
CPUs that do have registers, some support operations directly on memory.
Register size does not constrain the set of operations that are
available; for example a CPU might have 64-bit registers and support
both 64-bit and 32-bit operations.

Registers are largely irrelevant.

[...]

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */