n 2016-06-29 06:00, Didier Kryn wrote: > Le 29/06/2016 11:54, Peter Olson a écrit :
[..] >> They are talking about numbers, so the largest such number is the most >> negative. >> >> You might want to think about what is being said before you make a claim >> that something is idiotic. > > Edward is right here. The thing is just badly expressed; these > authors mean the negative number with the largest absolute value. > Otherwise, whatever the number of bits, the largest negative integer > is, of course -1. No, really. If you have ever written a function that converts str -> int(of whatever width) you will inevitably run into the 32678 -> -32786 problem trying to validate 16 bit numbers. It's tricky, but can be solved. > The thing is just badly expressed I don't think so. It is expressed in a way that guides implementors. You have to read it in that light. Peter Olson _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list [email protected] https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng
