C++ Standard §3.9.1 Fundamental types
Objects declared as characters (char)
shall be large enough to store any
member of the implementation’s basic
character set. If a character from
this set is stored in a character
object, the integral value of that
character object is equal to the value
of the single character literal form
of that character. It is
implementation-defined whether a char
object can hold negative values.
Characters can be explicitly declared
unsigned or signed. Plain char, signed
char, and unsigned char are three
distinct types.<...>
I could not make sense of unsigned char.
A number may be +1 or -1.
I can not think -A and +A in similar manner.
What is the Historical reason of introducing unsigned char.
A char is actually an integral type. It is just that the type is also used to represent a character too. Since it is an integral type, it is valid to talk about signedness.
(I don't know exactly about the historical reason. Probably to save a keyword for byte by conflating it with char.)
In C (and thus C++), char does not mean character. It means a byte (int_least8_t). This is a historical legacy from the pre-Unicode days when a characters could actually fit in a char, but is now a flaw in the language.
Since char is really a small integer, having signed char and unsigned char makes sense. There are actually three distinct char types: char, signed char, and unsigned char. A common convention is that unsigned char represents bytes while plain char represents characters UTF-8 code units.
Computers do not "understand" the concept of alphabets or characters; they only work on numbers. So a bunch of people got together and agreed on what number maps to what letter. The most common one in use is ASCII (although the language does not guarantee that).
In ASCII, the letter A has the code 65. In environments using ASCII, the letter A would be represented by the number 65.
The char datatype also serves as an integral type - meaning that it can hold just numbers, so unsigned and signed was allowed. On most platforms I've seen, char is a single 8-bit byte.
You're reading too much in to it. A character is a small integral type that can hold a character. End of story. Unsigned char was never introduced or intended, it's just how it is, because char is an integral type identical to int or long or short, it's just the size that's different. The fact is that there's little reason to use unsigned char, but people do if they want one-byte unsigned integral storage.
If you want a small memory foot print and want to store a number than signed and unsigned char are usefull.
unsigned char is needed if you want to use a value between 128-255
unsigned char score = 232;
signed char is usfull if you want to store the difference between two characters.
signed char diff = 'D' - 'A';
char is distinct from the other two because you can not assume it is either.
You can use the the overflow from 255 to 0? (I don't know. Just a guess)
Maybe it is not only about characters but also about numbers between -128 and 127, and 0 to 255.
Think of the ASCII character set.
Historically, all characters used for text in computing were defined by the ASCII character set. Each character was represented by an 8 bit byte, which was unsigned, hence each character had a value in the range of 0 - 255.
The word character was reduced to char for coding.
An 8 bit char used the same memory as an 8 bit byte and as such they were interchangeable as far as a compiler was concerned.
The compiler directive unsigned (all numbers were signed by default as twos compliment is used to represent negative numbers in binary) when applied to a byte or a char forced them to have a value in the range 0-255.
If unsigned then then had a value of -128 - +127.
Nowadays with the advent of UNICODE and multiple byte character sets this relationship between byte and char no longer exists.
Related
here is my code:
std::vector<unsigned char> data;
... // put some data to data vector
char* bytes= reinterpret_cast<char*>(imageData.data());
My problem is that in vector 'data' I have chars of value 255. After conversion in bytes pointer I have values of -1 instead of 255. How should I convert this data properly?
EDIT
Ok, its come up that I really dont need conversion but only a bits order. THX for trying help
char can be either signed or unsigned depending on the platform. If it is signed, like on your platform, it has a guaranteed range from -128 to 127 by the standard. For common platforms it is an 8bit type, so those are the only values that it can hold. This means that you can't represent 255 as a char.
Now to explain what you are seing: The typical representation of signed numbers in modern processors is two's-complement, for which -1 has the maximum representable bitpattern (all ones), which is the same as 255 for ùnsigned char. So the cast does exactly what you ask it to: reinterpreting the unsigned chars as (signed) chars.
However I can't tell you how to convert the data properly, since that depends on what you want to do with it. The way you are doing it might be fine for your purposes, if it isn't your only choice is to change the datatype.
This works as it should. Your char type has a size of 1 byte which equals to 8 bits. If it's unsigned, all of the bits are used to hold the value, which makes the maximum value that a char can hold 255 (28 = 256 different values, starting with 0).
In case of signed char, one bit is used to hold the sign instead of the value, which leaves you only 7 bts for the value, allowing to store numbers from -128 to 127.
So, when you hold 255 in a unsigned char, all the bits are interpreted as the value, thus you have 255. If you convert it to signed char, the first bit starts to be treated as the sign bit, and the data in the variable starts to be interpreted as -1.
Is it really necessary to use unsigned char to hold binary data as in some libraries which work on character encoding or binary buffers? To make sense of my question, have a look at the code below -
char c[5], d[5];
c[0] = 0xF0;
c[1] = 0xA4;
c[2] = 0xAD;
c[3] = 0xA2;
c[4] = '\0';
printf("%s\n", c);
memcpy(d, c, 5);
printf("%s\n", d);
both the printf's output 𤭢 correctly, where f0 a4 ad a2 is the encoding for the Unicode code-point U+24B62 (𤭢) in hex.
Even memcpy also correctly copied the bits held by a char.
What reasoning could possibly advocate the use of unsigned char instead of a plain char?
In other related questions unsigned char is highlighted because it is the only (byte/smallest) data type which is guaranteed to have no padding by the C-specification. But as the above example showed, the output doesn't seem to be affected by any padding as such.
I have used VC++ Express 2010 and MinGW to compile the above. Although VC gave the warning
warning C4309: '=' : truncation of constant value
the output doesn't seems to reflect that.
P.S. This could be marked a possible duplicate of Should a buffer of bytes be signed or unsigned char buffer? but my intent is different. I am asking why something which seems to be working as fine with char should be typed unsigned char?
Update: To quote from N3337,
Section 3.9 Types
2 For any object (other than a base-class subobject) of trivially
copyable type T, whether or not the object holds a valid value of type
T, the underlying bytes (1.7) making up the object can be copied into
an array of char or unsigned char. If the content of the array of char
or unsigned char is copied back into the object, the object shall
subsequently hold its original value.
In view of the above fact and that my original example was on Intel machine where char defaults to signed char, am still not convinced if unsigned char should be preferred over char.
Anything else?
In C the unsigned char data type is the only data type that has all the following three properties simultaneously
it has no padding bits, that it where all storage bits contribute to the value of the data
no bitwise operation starting from a value of that type, when converted back into that type, can produce overflow, trap representations or undefined behavior
it may alias other data types without violating the "aliasing rules", that is that access to the same data through a pointer that is typed differently will be guaranteed to see all modifications
if these are the properties of a "binary" data type you are looking for, you definitively should use unsigned char.
For the second property we need a type that is unsigned. For these all conversion are defined with modulo arihmetic, here modulo UCHAR_MAX+1, 256 in most 99% of the architectures. All conversion of wider values to unsigned char thereby just corresponds to truncation to the least significant byte.
The two other character types generally don't work the same. signed char is signed, anyhow, so conversion of values that don't fit it is not well defined. char is not fixed to be signed or unsigned, but on a particular platform to which your code is ported it might be signed even it is unsigned on yours.
You'll get most of your problems when comparing the contents of individual bytes:
char c[5];
c[0] = 0xff;
/*blah blah*/
if (c[0] == 0xff)
{
printf("good\n");
}
else
{
printf("bad\n");
}
can print "bad", because, depending on your compiler, c[0] will be sign extended to -1, which is not any way the same as 0xff
The plain char type is problematic and shouldn't be used for anything but strings. The main problem with char is that you can't know whether it is signed or unsigned: this is implementation-defined behavior. This makes char different from int etc, int is always guaranteed to be signed.
Although VC gave the warning ... truncation of constant value
It is telling you that you are trying to store int literals inside char variables. This might be related to the signedness: if you try to store an integer with value > 0x7F inside a signed character, unexpected things might happen. Formally, this is undefined behavior in C, though practically you'd just get a weird output if attempting to print the result as an integer value stored inside a (signed) char.
In this specific case, the warning shouldn't matter.
EDIT :
In other related questions unsigned char is highlighted because it is the only (byte/smallest) data type which is guaranteed to have no padding by the C-specification.
In theory, all integer types except unsigned char and signed char are allowed to contain "padding bits", as per C11 6.2.6.2:
"For unsigned integer types other than unsigned char, the bits of the
object representation shall be divided into two groups: value bits and
padding bits (there need not be any of the latter)."
"For signed integer types, the bits of the object representation shall
be divided into three groups: value bits, padding bits, and the sign
bit. There need not be any padding bits; signed char shall not have
any padding bits."
The C standard is intentionally vague and fuzzy, allowing these theoretical padding bits because:
It allows different symbol tables than the standard 8-bit ones.
It allows implementation-defined signedness and weird signed integer formats such as one's complement or "sign and magnitude".
An integer may not necessarily use all bits allocated.
However, in the real world outside the C standard, the following applies:
Symbol tables are almost certainly 8 bits (UTF8 or ASCII). Some weird exceptions exist, but clean implementations use the standard type wchar_t when implementing symbols tables larger than 8 bits.
Signedness is always two's complement.
An integer always uses all bits allocated.
So there is no real reason to use unsigned char or signed char just to dodge some theoretical scenario in the C standard.
Bytes are usually intended as unsigned 8 bit wide integers.
Now, char doesn't specify the sign of the integer: on some compilers char could be signed, on other it may be unsigned.
If I add a bit shift operation to the code you wrote, then I will have an undefined behaviour. The added comparison will also have an unexpected result.
char c[5], d[5];
c[0] = 0xF0;
c[1] = 0xA4;
c[2] = 0xAD;
c[3] = 0xA2;
c[4] = '\0';
c[0] >>= 1; // If char is signed, will the 7th bit go to 0 or stay the same?
bool isBiggerThan0 = c[0] > 0; // FALSE if char is signed!
printf("%s\n", c);
memcpy(d, c, 5);
printf("%s\n", d);
Regarding the warning during the compilation: if the char is signed then you are trying to assign the value 0xf0, which cannot be represented in the signed char (range -128 to +127), so it will be casted to a signed value (-16).
Declaring the char as unsigned will remove the warning, and is always good to have a clean build without any warning.
The signed-ness of the plain char type is implementation defined, so unless you're actually dealing with character data (a string using the platform's character set - usually ASCII), it's usually better to specify the signed-ness explicitly by either using signed char or unsigned char.
For binary data, the best choice is most probably unsigned char, especially if bitwise operations will be performed on the data (specifically bit shifting, which doesn't behave the same for signed types as for unsigned types).
I am asking why something which seems to be working as fine with char should be typed unsigned char?
If you do things which are not "correct" in the sense of the standard, you rely on undefined behaviour. Your compiler might do it the way you want today, but you don't know what it does tomorrow. You don't know what GCC does or VC++ 2012. Or even if the behaviour depends on external factors or Debug/Release compiles etc. As soon as you leave the safe path of the standard, you might run into trouble.
Well, what do you call "binary data"? This is a bunch of bits, without any meaning assigned to them by that specific part of software that calls them "binary data". What's the closest primitive data type, which conveys the idea of the lack of any specific meaning to any one of these bits? I think unsigned char.
Is it really necessary to use unsigned char to hold binary data as in some libraries which work on character encoding or binary buffers?
"really" necessary? No.
It is a very good idea though, and there are many reasons for this.
Your example uses printf, which not type-safe. That is, printf takes it's formatting cues from the format string and not from the data type. You could just as easily tried:
printf("%s\n", (void*)c);
... and the result would have been the same. If you try the same thing with c++ iostreams, the result will be different (depending on the signed-ness of c).
What reasoning could possibly advocate the use of unsigned char instead of a plain char?
Signed specifies that the most significant bit of the data (for unsigned char the 8-th bit) represents the sign. Since you obviously do not need that, you should specify your data is unsigned (the "sign" bit represents data, not the sign of the other bits).
What's the point of negative ASCII values?
int a = '«'; //a = -85 but as in ASCII table '<<' should be 174
There are no negative ASCII values. ASCII includes definitions for 128 characters. Their indexes are all positive (or zero!).
You're seeing this negative value because the character is from an Extended ASCII set and is too large to fit into the char literal. The value therefore overflows into the bit of your char (signed on your system, apparently) that defines negativeness.
The workaround is to write the value directly:
unsigned char a = 0xAE; // «
I've written it in hexadecimal notation for convention and because I think it looks prettier than 174. :)
This is an artefact of your compiler's char type being a signed integer type, and int being a wider signed integer type, and thus the character constant is considered a negative number and is sign-extended to the wider integer type.
There is not much sense in it, it just happens. The C standard allows for compiler implementations to choose whether they consider char to be signed or unsigned. Some compilers even have compile time switches to change the default. If you want to make sure about the signedness of the char type, explicitly write signed char or unsigned char, respectively.
Use an unsigned char to be extended to an int to avoid the negative int value, or open a whole new Pandora's box and enjoy wchar.
There is no such thing. ASCII is a table of characters, each character has an index, or a position, in the table. There are no "negative" indices.
Some compilers, though, consider char to be a signed integral data type, which is probably the reason for the confusion here.
If you print it as unsigned int, you will get the same bits interpreted as a unsigned (positive) value.
ASCII ranges 0..127, ANSI (also called 'extended ASCII') ranges 0..255.
ANSI range won't fit in a signed char (the default type for characters in most compilers).
Most compilers have an option like 'char' Type is Unsigned (GCC).
I had this artifact. When you use char as symbols you have no problem. But when you use it as integer (with isalpha(), etc.) and the ASCII code is greater then 127, then the 'char' interpret as 'signed char' and isalpha() return an exception. When I need use the 'char' as integer I cast the 'char' to unsigned:
isalpha((unsigned char)my_char);
#n0rd: koi8 codepage uses ascii from 128 to 255 and other national codepages: http://www.asciitable.com/
In a character representation, you have 8 bits (1 byte) allotted.
Out of this, the first bit is used to represent sign. In the case of unsigned character, it uses all 8 bits to represent a number allowing 0 to 255 where
128-255 are called extended ASCII.
Due to the representation in the memory as I have described, we have -1 having the same value as 255, char(-2)==char(254)
What is the relation between word length, character size, integer size, and byte in C++?
The standard requires that certain types have minimum sizes (short is at least 16 bits, int is at least 16 bits, etc), and that some groups of type are ordered (sizeof(int) >= sizeof(short) >= sizeof(char)).
In C++ a char must be large enough to hold any character in the implemetation's basic character set.
int has the "natural size suggested by the architecture of the execution environment". Note that this means that an int does not need to be at least 32-bits in size. Implementations where int is 16 bits are common (think embedded ot MS-DOS).
The following are taken from various parts of the C++98 and C99 standards:
long int has to be at least as large as int
int has to be at least as large as short
short has to be at least as large as char
Note that they could all be the same size.
Also (assuming a two's complement implementation):
long int has to be at least 32-bits
int has to be at least 16-bits
short has to be at least 16-bits
char has to be at least 8 bits
The Standard doesn't know this "word" thingy used by processors. But it says the type "int" should have the natural size for a execution environment. But even for 64 bit environments, int is usually only 32 bits. So "word" in Standard terms has pretty much no common meaning (except for the common English "word" of course).
Character size is the size of a character. Depends on what character you talk about. Character types are char, unsigned char and signed char. Also wchar_t is used to store characters that can have any size (determined by the implementation - but must use one of the integer types as its underlying type. Much like enumerations), while char/signed char or unsigned char has to have one byte. That means that one byte has as much bits as one char has. If an implementation says one object of type char has 16 bits, then a byte has 16 bits too.
Now a byte is the size that one char occupies. It's a unit, not some specific type. There is not much more about it, just that it is the unit that you can access memory. I.e you do not have pointer access to bit-fields, but you have access to units starting at one byte.
"Integer size" now is pretty wide. What do you mean? All of bool, char, short, int, long and their unsinged counterparts are integers. Their range is what i would call "integer size" and it is documented in the C standard - taken over by the C++ Standard. For signed char the range is from -127 <-> 127, for short and int it is the same and is -2^15+1 <-> 2^15-1 and for long it is -2^31+1 <-> 2^31-1. Their unsigned counterparts range from 0 up to 2^8-1, 2^16-1 and 2^32-1 respectively. Those are however minimal sizes. That is, an int may not have maximal size 2^14 on any platform, because that is less than 2^15-1 of course. It follows for those values that a minimum of bits is required. For char that is 8, for short/int that is 16 and for long that is 32. Two's-complement representation for negative numbers is not required, which is why the negative value is not -128 instead of -127 for example for signed char.
Standard C++ doesn't have a datatype called word or byte. The rest are well defined as ranges. The base is a char which has of CHAR_BITS bits. The most commonly used value of CHAR_BITS is 8.
sizeof( char ) == 1 ( one byte ) (in c++, in C - not specified)
sizeof( int ) >= sizeof( char )
word - not c++ type, usualy in computer architecture it mean 2 bytes
Kind of depends on what you mean by relation. The size of numeric types is generally a multiple of the machine word size. A byte is a byte is a byte -- 8 bits, no more, no less. A character is defined in the standard as a single unsigned byte I believe (check your ARM for details).
The general rule is, don't make any assumptions about the actual size of data types. The standard specifies relationships between the types such as a "long" integer will be either the same size or larger than an "int". Individual implementations of the language will pick specific sizes for the types that are convenient for them. For example, a compiler for a 64-bit processor will choose different sizes than a compiler for a 32-bit processor.
You can use the sizeof() operator to examine the specific sizes for the compiler you are using (on the specific target architecture).
In C/C++, what an unsigned char is used for? How is it different from a regular char?
In C++, there are three distinct character types:
char
signed char
unsigned char
If you are using character types for text, use the unqualified char:
it is the type of character literals like 'a' or '0' (in C++ only, in C their type is int)
it is the type that makes up C strings like "abcde"
It also works out as a number value, but it is unspecified whether that value is treated as signed or unsigned. Beware character comparisons through inequalities - although if you limit yourself to ASCII (0-127) you're just about safe.
If you are using character types as numbers, use:
signed char, which gives you at least the -127 to 127 range. (-128 to 127 is common)
unsigned char, which gives you at least the 0 to 255 range.
"At least", because the C++ standard only gives the minimum range of values that each numeric type is required to cover. sizeof (char) is required to be 1 (i.e. one byte), but a byte could in theory be for example 32 bits. sizeof would still be report its size as 1 - meaning that you could have sizeof (char) == sizeof (long) == 1.
This is implementation dependent, as the C standard does NOT define the signed-ness of char. Depending on the platform, char may be signed or unsigned, so you need to explicitly ask for signed char or unsigned char if your implementation depends on it. Just use char if you intend to represent characters from strings, as this will match what your platform puts in the string.
The difference between signed char and unsigned char is as you'd expect. On most platforms, signed char will be an 8-bit two's complement number ranging from -128 to 127, and unsigned char will be an 8-bit unsigned integer (0 to 255). Note the standard does NOT require that char types have 8 bits, only that sizeof(char) return 1. You can get at the number of bits in a char with CHAR_BIT in limits.h. There are few if any platforms today where this will be something other than 8, though.
There is a nice summary of this issue here.
As others have mentioned since I posted this, you're better off using int8_t and uint8_t if you really want to represent small integers.
Because I feel it's really called for, I just want to state some rules of C and C++ (they are the same in this regard). First, all bits of unsigned char participate in determining the value if any unsigned char object. Second, unsigned char is explicitly stated unsigned.
Now, I had a discussion with someone about what happens when you convert the value -1 of type int to unsigned char. He refused the idea that the resulting unsigned char has all its bits set to 1, because he was worried about sign representation. But he didn't have to be. It's immediately following out of this rule that the conversion does what is intended:
If the new type is unsigned, the value is converted by repeatedly adding or subtracting one more than the maximum value that can be represented in the new type until the value is in the range of the new type. (6.3.1.3p2 in a C99 draft)
That's a mathematical description. C++ describes it in terms of modulo calculus, which yields to the same rule. Anyway, what is not guaranteed is that all bits in the integer -1 are one before the conversion. So, what do we have so we can claim that the resulting unsigned char has all its CHAR_BIT bits turned to 1?
All bits participate in determining its value - that is, no padding bits occur in the object.
Adding only one time UCHAR_MAX+1 to -1 will yield a value in range, namely UCHAR_MAX
That's enough, actually! So whenever you want to have an unsigned char having all its bits one, you do
unsigned char c = (unsigned char)-1;
It also follows that a conversion is not just truncating higher order bits. The fortunate event for two's complement is that it is just a truncation there, but the same isn't necessarily true for other sign representations.
As for example usages of unsigned char:
unsigned char is often used in computer graphics, which very often (though not always) assigns a single byte to each colour component. It is common to see an RGB (or RGBA) colour represented as 24 (or 32) bits, each an unsigned char. Since unsigned char values fall in the range [0,255], the values are typically interpreted as:
0 meaning a total lack of a given colour component.
255 meaning 100% of a given colour pigment.
So you would end up with RGB red as (255,0,0) -> (100% red, 0% green, 0% blue).
Why not use a signed char? Arithmetic and bit shifting becomes problematic. As explained already, a signed char's range is essentially shifted by -128. A very simple and naive (mostly unused) method for converting RGB to grayscale is to average all three colour components, but this runs into problems when the values of the colour components are negative. Red (255, 0, 0) averages to (85, 85, 85) when using unsigned char arithmetic. However, if the values were signed chars (127,-128,-128), we would end up with (-99, -99, -99), which would be (29, 29, 29) in our unsigned char space, which is incorrect.
signed char has range -128 to 127; unsigned char has range 0 to 255.
char will be equivalent to either signed char or unsigned char, depending on the compiler, but is a distinct type.
If you're using C-style strings, just use char. If you need to use chars for arithmetic (pretty rare), specify signed or unsigned explicitly for portability.
unsigned char takes only positive values....like 0 to 255
where as
signed char takes both positive and negative values....like -128 to +127
char and unsigned char aren't guaranteed to be 8-bit types on all platforms—they are guaranteed to be 8-bit or larger. Some platforms have 9-bit, 32-bit, or 64-bit bytes. However, the most common platforms today (Windows, Mac, Linux x86, etc.) have 8-bit bytes.
An unsigned char is an unsigned byte value (0 to 255). You may be thinking of char in terms of being a "character" but it is really a numerical value. The regular char is signed, so you have 128 values, and these values map to characters using ASCII encoding. But in either case, what you are storing in memory is a byte value.
In terms of direct values a regular char is used when the values are known to be between CHAR_MIN and CHAR_MAX while an unsigned char provides double the range on the positive end. For example, if CHAR_BIT is 8, the range of regular char is only guaranteed to be [0, 127] (because it can be signed or unsigned) while unsigned char will be [0, 255] and signed char will be [-127, 127].
In terms of what it's used for, the standards allow objects of POD (plain old data) to be directly converted to an array of unsigned char. This allows you to examine the representation and bit patterns of the object. The same guarantee of safe type punning doesn't exist for char or signed char.
unsigned char is the heart of all bit trickery. In almost all compilers for all platforms an unsigned char is simply a byte and an unsigned integer of (usually) 8 bits that can be treated as a small integer or a pack of bits.
In addition, as someone else has said, the standard doesn't define the sign of a char. So you have 3 distinct char types: char, signed char, unsigned char.
If you like using various types of specific length and signedness, you're probably better off with uint8_t, int8_t, uint16_t, etc simply because they do exactly what they say.
Some googling found this, where people had a discussion about this.
An unsigned char is basically a single byte. So, you would use this if you need one byte of data (for example, maybe you want to use it to set flags on and off to be passed to a function, as is often done in the Windows API).
An unsigned char uses the bit that is reserved for the sign of a regular char as another number. This changes the range to [0 - 255] as opposed to [-128 - 127].
Generally unsigned chars are used when you don't want a sign. This will make a difference when doing things like shifting bits (shift extends the sign) and other things when dealing with a char as a byte rather than using it as a number.
unsigned char takes only positive values: 0 to 255 while
signed char takes positive and negative values: -128 to +127.
quoted frome "the c programming laugage" book:
The qualifier signed or unsigned may be applied to char or any integer. unsigned numbers
are always positive or zero, and obey the laws of arithmetic modulo 2^n, where n is the number
of bits in the type. So, for instance, if chars are 8 bits, unsigned char variables have values
between 0 and 255, while signed chars have values between -128 and 127 (in a two' s
complement machine.) Whether plain chars are signed or unsigned is machine-dependent,
but printable characters are always positive.
signed char and unsigned char both represent 1byte, but they have different ranges.
Type | range
-------------------------------
signed char | -128 to +127
unsigned char | 0 to 255
In signed char if we consider char letter = 'A', 'A' is represent binary of 65 in ASCII/Unicode, If 65 can be stored, -65 also can be stored. There are no negative binary values in ASCII/Unicode there for no need to worry about negative values.
Example
#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{
signed char char1 = 255;
signed char char2 = -128;
unsigned char char3 = 255;
unsigned char char4 = -128;
printf("Signed char(255) : %d\n",char1);
printf("Unsigned char(255) : %d\n",char3);
printf("\nSigned char(-128) : %d\n",char2);
printf("Unsigned char(-128) : %d\n",char4);
return 0;
}
Output -:
Signed char(255) : -1
Unsigned char(255) : 255
Signed char(-128) : -128
Unsigned char(-128) : 128