From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id OAA09365; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:53:38 +0100 (MET) X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f Received: from nez-perce.inria.fr (nez-perce.inria.fr [192.93.2.78]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id OAA09352 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:53:34 +0100 (MET) Received: from qrnik.knm.org.pl (paf87.warszawa.sdi.tpnet.pl [217.96.225.87]) by nez-perce.inria.fr (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h9UDrX108549 for ; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:53:33 +0100 (MET) Received: from qrnik ([192.168.0.1] ident=qrczak) by qrnik.knm.org.pl with esmtp (Exim 3.36 #1) id 1AFDEy-0002re-00 for caml-list@inria.fr; Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:53:32 +0100 Subject: [Caml-list] Int overflow in literals From: "Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk" To: caml-list@inria.fr Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1067522012.5880.6.camel@qrnik> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:53:32 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr X-Spam: no; 0.00; marcin:01 'qrczak':01 kowalczyk:01 qrczak:01 marcin:01 kowalczyk:01 qrczak:01 imho:01 int:01 int:01 arithmetic:01 writes:01 knm:01 knm:01 overflow:02 Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr Precedence: bulk I understand that int overflow is not checked on arithmetic for efficiency reasons, but IMHO it would be better if it was checked at least in literals. When someone writes 10000000000, he certainly does not mean -737418240. It caused confusion in a class when someone was interactively testing a function with larger and larger inputs. -- __("< Marcin Kowalczyk \__/ qrczak@knm.org.pl ^^ http://qrnik.knm.org.pl/~qrczak/ ------------------- To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/ Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners