Thomas Wouters wrote: > On 8/26/06, David Hopwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> CPython should be fixed anyway. The correct fix is >> "if (y == -1 && x < 0 && (unsigned long)x == -(unsigned long)x)". > > Why not just "... && x == LONG_MIN"?
Because the intent is to check that x / y does not overflow a long, and x == LONG_MIN would not cause an overflow on 1's complement or sign-magnitude systems. (CPython has probably only been tested on 2's complement systems anyway, but if we're going to be pedantic about depending only on things in the C standard...) -- David Hopwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> _______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
