Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!aioe.org!news.glorb.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post01.iad.highwinds-media.com!newsfe11.iad.POSTED!00000000!not-for-mail
From: David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.2.18) Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11
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> <ivoiap$gru$1@dont-email.me> <drmdnTkz1raR1b3TnZ2dnUVZ_q-dnZ2d@earthlink.com> <ivr43p$7cq$1@dont-email.me> <4e278a67$0$309$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <1SSVp.69032$_I7.18660@newsfe08.iad> <j08v14$brk$1@speranza.aioe.org> <slrnj2g735.6gl.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> <bIBWp.70194$_I7.12878@newsfe08.iad> <j0eree$uke$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In-Reply-To: <j0eree$uke$1@speranza.aioe.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <tFEWp.68513$5v5.34135@newsfe11.iad>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.193.237.254
X-Complaints-To: abuse@cogeco.net
X-Trace: newsfe11.iad 1311446745 67.193.237.254 (Sat, 23 Jul 2011 18:45:45 UTC)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 18:45:45 UTC
Date: Sat, 23 Jul 2011 14:45:41 -0400
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:6474

On 23/07/2011 12:04 PM, 
supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations wrote:
> On 23/07/2011 11:23 AM, David Lamb wrote:
>> On 21/07/2011 8:32 AM, Andreas Leitgeb wrote:
>>> agreeCount = agreeCount.plus(AgreeCount.ONE)
>>> on painfulness of non-primitive math.
>>
>> or if you think ++ is common enough:
>> agreeCount.increment();
>> and generally
>> agreeCount.add(someOtherAgreeCount)
>> and if you decide to have your operators return "this"
>> ac0.mul(ac1).plus(ac2)) // ac0 = ac0*ac1+ac2
>> or
>> ac = (new AgreeCount(ac0)).mul(ac1).plus(ac2) // ac = ac0*ac1+ac2
>
> Eww. Mutable number classes.
>
> I think I'm going to throw up.
>

It's what happens to ordinary ints in most machine languages. Feel free 
to define the less-efficient functional versions that always generate 
new objects. The main point was that the method calls aren't necessarily 
all that hard to read.