http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=7006



--- Comment #3 from Don <clugd...@yahoo.com.au> 2011-12-02 05:01:01 PST ---
(In reply to comment #2)
> That is like saying 1/2 should give a div by zero error because the result 
> does
> not fit in an integer and therefore it must always indicate a bug.

Accidental use of integer division instead of floating point division is a
very, very common bug.

> I want this:
> 
> assert(a ^^ -1 == 1/a);

Why do you want that? Do you have any use cases where it's not a bug?

> This is only div by zero if a is zero.
> 
> 
> (BTW: This does not give a div by zero error on my x86 machine, and I have no
> clue why you think it should: void main(){auto x = -1; x = x/(x-int.max);})

Sorry, got it upside down. It's -int.max -1, divided by -1.
This generates a hardware division error. Depending on the OS, your OS may
inspect the operands to determine if it is a div by zero, or this special case:

void main(){auto x = 1; x = (-1-int.max)/-x;}

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------

Reply via email to