Umm, signed integers are UB on overflow; unsigned is always fine. | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

		tekne 5 months ago \| parent \| context \| favorite \| on: Doom crash after 2.5 years of real-world runtime c... Umm, signed integers are UB on overflow; unsigned is always fine.

jbreckmckye 5 months ago [–]

Sorry, you are correct. I don't think unsigned overflow behaviour was defined until C99 though.

Anyway, in answer to the question, I would guess the reason was because of signed / unsigned type promotion.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact