Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!newsfeed.hal-mli.net!feeder1.hal-mli.net!border3.nntp.dca.giganews.com!Xl.tags.giganews.com!border1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!local2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.earthlink.com!news.earthlink.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 10:56:17 -0500 Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 08:56:13 -0700 From: Patricia Shanahan User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.2; WOW64; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: Arithmetic overflow checking References: <015aeb15-57db-48ab-9cd4-77f8448b632f@w24g2000yqw.googlegroups.com> <2rydnez7l-H5BYnTnZ2dnUVZ_vGdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <4e278a67$0$309$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <1SSVp.69032$_I7.18660@newsfe08.iad> <4e2892f1$0$309$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <1f3f067f-1753-4f6b-876d-19f92059d9b8@e20g2000prf.googlegroups.com> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: Lines: 35 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com NNTP-Posting-Host: 70.230.200.239 X-Trace: sv3-SMYyn64bDWbw3QkECN+d1j4e7+ADSiUZ4Dv9ku7Zx2mJ85zWMfO0uokk91VKER5hNt4kFJ/LQxRg62K!t8+7ri0hk/ag0ScbCHUoxqz2i7FlVgoGju/uQ3Nm+GMj1PDwSMreNY7l3+xyS62RHw7alt/+TJyI!3Zyh5CKU9I+mETrkg2YkDraizkPEbZAF50p4ya+grmsRymY= X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 X-Original-Bytes: 3667 Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:6506 On 7/23/2011 1:09 PM, Andreas Leitgeb wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> On 7/22/2011 4:16 PM, Andreas Leitgeb wrote: >>> lewbloch wrote: >>>> On Jul 22, 10:33 am, Andreas Leitgeb >>>> wrote: >>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>> [about lack of operator overloading for non-primitive arithmetic types] >>>>>> The problem is not just the keystrokes for typing the expressions. >>>>>> It is very important to be able to check that a lengthy expression >>>>>> in a program is a correct translation of the corresponding expression, >>>>>> in mathematical notation, in a textbook or paper. >>>>> Lew? >>>> Yes? >>> So here are arguments (admittedly not mine) that include ("... not just...") >>> but also go beyond the complaint about the number of keystrokes. I was just >>> wondering, if you had any expert-opinion about them, that you'd care to share. >> Some of the context has been dropped in editing. My remarks were >> specific to the complex, in every sense of the word, expressions I've >> seen in scientific and engineering programs. > > You meant only complex expressions on complex numbers? (Is that every sense > of "complex", or did I even miss some more?) > If so, then sorry, I obviously understood your remarks as more general than they > were. It's not my intention to misquote contexts and all that. I apologize > if it happened. > No problem. My practical experience of cases in which I think representing expressions in method calls would be disastrous is complicated expressions in complex numbers. It seems reasonable to me that it might also be a problem e.g. for a rational type or for BigDecimal, but I don't have direct observations to back that up. Patricia