On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 04:38:54PM -0700, Richard Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:23 PM, <keld_at_[hidden]> wrote:
>
> > I used to program some of these beast a while ago.
> > There were C compilers and some UNIX port for them.
> >
>
> Did their C compilers expose non-twos-complement integers, or did they
> emulate twos-complement?

I don't remember. Although I was the resident UNIX expert, I did not use
that UNIX system very much.

Best regards
keld


>
> > Best regards
> > keld
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 03:40:47PM -0700, Richard Smith wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 19, 2013 at 8:51 PM, Jason Merrill <jason_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 10/18/2013 11:15 PM, Lawrence Crowl wrote:
> > > > > There were machines being sold in the 90's that were not two's
> > > > complement, but I've lost track
> > > > > since then.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6971886/exotic-architectures-the-standard-committee-cares-about
> > > >
> > > > The Unisys machine mentioned in the top-rated answer still seems to be
> > > > sold.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Has anyone ever written a non-twos-complement C++ compiler for this
> > machine?
> > > Has anyone ever written *any* non-twos-complement C++ implementation?
> > > And... does anyone intend to write a non-twos-complement
> > *C++17*implementation?
> > >
> > > If the answer to these questions is "don't know", how do we find out?
> > > Strawman suggestion: remove non-twos-complement support from the standard
> > > and wait to see if anyone complains (with the intent that we would
> > restore
> > > such support if there are actual complaints, not just hypothetical ones).
> > > The world would have nearly four years to notice and react. Thoughts?
> >
> >