Don:
> The question was about incrementing uint, not int. Preventing wraparound
> on uints would break everything!
If optional runtime overflow controls are added to integral values, then they
are performed on ubyte/ushort/uint/ulong/ucent too, because leaving a hole in
that safety net is very bad and useless.
In modules where you need wraparounds, you can tell the compiler to disable
such controls (recently I have suggested a syntax that works locally: safe(...)
{...}, but Walter seems to prefer a module-level syntax for this).
Bye,
bearophile
