Why is unsigned integer overflow defined behavior but signed integer overflow isn’t?

by

The historical reason is that most C implementations (compilers) just used whatever overflow behaviour was easiest to implement with the integer representation it used. C implementations usually used the same representation used by the CPU – so the overflow behavior followed from the integer representation used by the CPU.

In practice, it is only the representations for signed values that may differ according to the implementation: one’s complement, two’s complement, sign-magnitude. For an unsigned type there is no reason for the standard to allow variation because there is only one obvious binary representation (the standard only allows binary representation).

Relevant quotes:

C99 6.2.6.1:3:

Values stored in unsigned bit-fields and objects of type unsigned char shall be represented using a pure binary notation.

C99 6.2.6.2:2:

If the sign bit is one, the value shall be modified in one of the following ways:

— the corresponding value with sign bit 0 is negated (sign and magnitude);

— the sign bit has the value −(2N) (two’s complement);

— the sign bit has the value −(2N − 1) (one’s complement).

Nowadays, all processors use two’s complement representation, but signed arithmetic overflow remains undefined and compiler makers want it to remain undefined because they use this undefinedness to help with optimization. See for instance this blog post by Ian Lance Taylor or this complaint by Agner Fog, and the answers to his bug report.

More Related Contents:

  1. Is signed integer overflow still undefined behavior in C++?
  2. Detecting signed overflow in C/C++
  3. Program behaving strangely on online IDEs
  4. How disastrous is integer overflow in C++?
  5. What is the strict aliasing rule?
  6. How do I detect unsigned integer overflow?
  7. C++ delete – It deletes my objects but I can still access the data?
  8. Do I need to cast to unsigned char before calling toupper(), tolower(), et al.?
  9. Is uninitialized local variable the fastest random number generator?
  10. May I treat a 2D array as a contiguous 1D array?
  11. Undefined behavior and sequence points reloaded
  12. Why do constant expressions have an exclusion for undefined behavior?
  13. How is a variable at the same address producing 2 different values? [duplicate]
  14. Why dereferencing a null pointer is undefined behaviour?
  15. Why should I not try to use “this” value after “delete this”?
  16. Why is out-of-bounds pointer arithmetic undefined behaviour?
  17. C++ compilation bug?
  18. Is this infinite recursion UB?
  19. Efficient unsigned-to-signed cast avoiding implementation-defined behavior
  20. Why are arguments which do not match the conversion specifier in printf undefined behavior?
  21. Implementing a std::vector like container without undefined behavior
  22. Is pointer comparison undefined or unspecified behavior in C++?
  23. new() without delete() is Undefined Behavior or merely Memory Leak? [duplicate]
  24. Why does printf(“%f”,0); give undefined behavior?
  25. Near constant time rotate that does not violate the standards
  26. At what point does dereferencing the null pointer become undefined behavior?
  27. Undefined behavior causing time travel
  28. When a float variable goes out of the float limits, what happens?
  29. Dangling references and undefined behavior
  30. If a 32-bit integer overflows, can we use a 40-bit structure instead of a 64-bit long one?

Leave a Comment