Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject: Re: Arithmetic overflow checking
Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 17:14:38 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <ivuu9e$gsr$1@dont-email.me>
References: <015aeb15-57db-48ab-9cd4-77f8448b632f@w24g2000yqw.googlegroups.com> <knha175c4hu8491pmmek09thqmo7niq3s2@4ax.com> <1f9c17dltrhlmhifuigoa914477r4rg1e1@4ax.com> <l_qdnfmZ-4tpt4vTnZ2dnUVZ_sqdnZ2d@earthlink.com> <koic171t5gas91890r8l9914v26snm7k1v@4ax.com> <b3d4a08b-3428-442a-8cce-30edc2868a47@5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com> <658108b9-3fa9-41dd-8701-9f342633864c@x12g2000yql.googlegroups.com> <ha4m17lfvbh9aia1a2uacjqo5hcln89u4l@4ax.com> <ivfbvm$iu5$1@dont-email.me> <ffrm171jqbq00bqgcien2jb87jo2l7a407@4ax.com> <ivfr62$pcf$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 17 Jul 2011 15:14:54 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="wPi9lIeh+Zbf1c90w8aX3g"; logging-data="17307"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/a9XTd2B/6fQ47nXgtvo5M"
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-GB; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11
In-Reply-To: <ivfr62$pcf$1@dont-email.me>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jg3EfdStNA/51u2FspQs7FnvnFI=
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:6244

On 11/07/2011 23:49, Joshua Cranmer allegedly wrote:
> On 7/11/2011 2:43 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 10:30:26 -0700, Joshua Cranmer
>> <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid>  wrote:
>>       Averaging a set of numbers with a sum too big would be caught by
>> overflow checking and not bounds checking.
> 
> What I advocated would basically be a "checked integer": every operation
> is guaranteed to have a result between [min, max]; if not, it throws an
> exception.

Sounds cool. Any chance we might see it in teh Jav one day? And is there
actually hardware support for it?

-- 
DF.
Determinism trumps correctness.