On 1/24/14 4:25 AM, Dominikus Dittes Scherkl wrote:
On Friday, 24 January 2014 at 11:43:08 UTC, eles wrote:
On Friday, 24 January 2014 at 10:40:46 UTC, Dominikus Dittes Scherkl
wrote:
On Thursday, 23 January 2014 at 20:35:56 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
int a = 2_000_000_000;
int b = a + a;
should not generate weird stuff like -294_967_296 (which it
Long discussion about signed/unsigned integer overflows...
But that is a HUGE source of errors, even in really carefully developed
software in safety critical systems!
I think it is well worth a thought to have a safe type in the language
s/language/standard library/
--> If I write code fast, without thinking about subtleties (like e.g.
the return type of main() in "hello world") I expect the compiler to do
something sensible (ok, I doesn't expect if from C, but we're talking
about a better language, do we?) and I don't expect highest performance.
So I would prefer to have save signed types as default and maybe new
types "sbyte", "sshort", "sint" etc if I need the last bit of
performance, but without automatic conversion to those unsave types.
Using fast signed types with all the over/underflow and other unsafe
stuff is like manual memory management and pointers instead of GC and
slices - useful to have in case you really need them, but not the default.
The short answer is - nagonna happen. Proposals for new standard library
types and artifacts are of course accepted and encouraged.
Andrei
