But -1\*INT_MIN is still 1 greater than INT_MAX in two's complement ... so that'... | Hacker News

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

loeg on Jan 28, 2013 | parent | context | favorite | on: IDIV DoS (INT_MIN / -1)

But -1*INT_MIN is still 1 greater than INT_MAX in two's complement ... so that's signed overflow and thus undefined behavior in C.

Assuming x86 signed overflow behavior, you're just back to INT_MIN again? Or am I crazy?

bdonlan on Jan 28, 2013 [–]

The language in question isn't C, so they can have whatever semantics they want.

loeg on Jan 29, 2013 | [–]

Sorry, the use of the nym INT_MIN suggested to me that the implementation under the covers was C.

It looks like it was once an interpreter, but is now compiled down to CLR and run with Mono.

Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4
Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact