On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 09:02:49 -0700 David Gileadi via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 11/19/14, 6:57 AM, ketmar via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > On Wed, 19 Nov 2014 13:47:50 +0000 > > Don via Digitalmars-d <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If I have two pencils of length 10 cm and 15 cm, then the first > >> one is -5 cm longer than the other. > > and again "length" is not a relation. show me pencil of length -10 cm. > > when you substractin lengthes, you got completely different type as a > > result, not "length" anymore. ah, that untyped real-life math! ;-) > > To me the salient point is that this is not just a mess with real-life > math but also with math in D: lengths are unsigned but people subtract > them all the time. If they're (un)lucky this will return correct values > for a while, but then someday the lengths may be reversed and the values > will be hugely wrong: > > int[] a = [1, 2, 3]; > int[] b = [5, 4, 3, 2, 1]; > > writefln("%s", b.length - a.length); // Yup, 2 > writefln("%s", a.length - b.length); // WAT? 18446744073709551614 > > This is why I agree with Don that: > > > Having arr.length return an unsigned type, is a dreadful language > > mistake. ah, let range checking catch that. sure, there are edge cases where range checking fails, but not so many. besides, overflows are possible with signed ints too, so what signed length does is simply hiding the bad code. any code reviewer must ring a bell when he sees length subtraction without prior checking, be it signed or unsigned. so there is no reason in negative lengthes anyway.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
