Re: integer overflow

[Davis Herring]

>> What's the point of doing that?  I would much prefer if read would just
>> raise an error.
>
> There are many cases where it's important to read an integer from some
> other program, so it's important to be able to read integers larger the
> Elisp's largest fixnum (tho less so for integers larger than the
> host system's natural "int").
> Examples are file sizes, process ids, user ids, ...

It seems to me that such cases are relevant to `string-to-*' more than to
`read'.   There is value in having them be consistent in their shared
domain, but there is also value in having the syntax of elisp not involve
magic thresholds where the type of a literal changes.

Davis

-- 
This product is sold by volume, not by mass.  If it appears too dense or
too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during
shipping.