I wonder, why Haskell does not check/report the overflow for Int?
For the Haskell implementation, it is natural to have the Int
arithmetic cost much less (about 5 times) than Integer.
Therefore, for the applications like the polynomial arithmetics
(and many others) that represent a power product as
"newtype PP = PP [Integer] " or "newtype PP' = PP' [Int] "
it worths to preserve both PP and PP'.
PP' is considerably cheaper in running, and PP is generic.
Unfortunately, PP' is incorrect.
For example, x^(2^n) --> x^0, if 2^n > maximal_Int.
For the algebra, it would be better to
*break in such case with the overflow message*.
With this, the researcher runs the faster program and does not
risk to get the incorrect result.
Setting things like newtype Int' = I' Int
in application and programming arithmetics in Haskell, probably,
would not do. This will run slow.
Besides, (I' 2)+x looks worse than 2+x.
So
1. is this good for Haskell to perform the Int arithmetic modulo
maximal_Int ?
2. in what way could it provide also Int' ?
------------------
Sergey Mechveliani
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
