[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: integer overflow
From: |
Helmut Eller |
Subject: |
Re: integer overflow |
Date: |
Sat, 06 Mar 2010 08:03:41 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.50 (gnu/linux) |
* Chong Yidong [2010-03-06 04:11+0100] writes:
>> Can you summarize how it's supposed to work?
>
> The change affects the Lisp reader: reading "536870912" or any larger
> number now gives you a float Lisp object, instead of an integer Lisp
> object (since there is no way to represent 536870912 or larger as
> integers). 536870911 and below are still read as integers.
What's the point of doing that? I would much prefer if read would just
raise and error.
Helmut
- Re: Next pretest, and branching plans, Glenn Morris, 2010/03/02
- Re: Next pretest, and branching plans, Johan Bockgård, 2010/03/05
- integer overflow [was Re: Next pretest, and branching plans], Glenn Morris, 2010/03/05
- Re: integer overflow, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/05
- Re: integer overflow, Glenn Morris, 2010/03/05
- Re: integer overflow, Chong Yidong, 2010/03/05
- Re: integer overflow,
Helmut Eller <=
- Re: integer overflow, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/06
- Re: integer overflow, Davis Herring, 2010/03/06
- RE: integer overflow, Drew Adams, 2010/03/06
- Re: integer overflow, Richard Stallman, 2010/03/07
- Re: integer overflow, David Kastrup, 2010/03/07
- Re: integer overflow, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2010/03/07
- Re: integer overflow, David Kastrup, 2010/03/07
- Re: integer overflow, Jay Belanger, 2010/03/07
- Re: integer overflow, Richard Stallman, 2010/03/08
- Guile in Emacs (was: integer overflow), Ted Zlatanov, 2010/03/08