I noticed that given
proc iraise()
{
var i32 = 1234567:uint(32);
var iXX = -i32;
var bad : int(32);
assert(numBits(iXX.type) == 64);
// bad = -i32;
}
iraise();
the default use of a uint(w) in a signed expression needs more precision.
Chapel is quite smart and promotes uint(w) to uint(w+w) because all the
possible uint(w)'s do not fit into a signed int of the same size.
Disabling the comment results in a compile-time error of a type-mismatch
as is very well covered/identified in the table on Page 42. That said, I
was mystified by the error message at first.
I tried to read 9.1.1 of the specification and see where this implicit
conversion was discussed and it was not obvious to me.
I thought about elaborating on it and adding some words to 9.1.1 but my
1st, 2nd and 3rd cut of explanations were unclear when I read them. Also,
I wondered what other nice features there were and realized that I was
not going to address all of the issues as I knew insufficient details.
A few extra lines by someone who knows heaps more than I do might be
advantageous.
I did not put this in Github because I cannot figure out to indent text,
cut-and-paste cleanly, justify text blocks,spell check, and so-on.
Besides, I am sure the above discussion can be distilled to something
simpler but someone skilled in using Github.
Regards - Damian
Pacific Engineering Systems International, 277-279 Broadway, Glebe NSW 2037
Ph:+61-2-8571-0847 .. Fx:+61-2-9692-9623 | unsolicited email not wanted here
Views & opinions here are mine and not those of any past or present employer
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Chapel-developers mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/chapel-developers
