Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #5905 > unrolled thread
| Started by | rop rop <rop049@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-07-06 08:35 -0700 |
| Last post | 2011-07-09 12:16 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 277 — 46 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer
Arithmetic overflow checking rop rop <rop049@gmail.com> - 2011-07-06 08:35 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-06 09:42 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking stefan@nyniva.se - 2011-07-06 11:30 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-06 11:36 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-18 23:06 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-06 10:16 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-07-07 02:26 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-18 23:07 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-07-07 07:11 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-07 10:02 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-07-07 17:51 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-07 20:04 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-07-07 20:29 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking rop rop <rop049@gmail.com> - 2011-07-08 15:52 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-18 23:12 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-07-09 10:31 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking rop rop <rop049@gmail.com> - 2011-07-09 02:58 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-07-09 08:53 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-09 07:46 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-18 23:17 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-07-18 23:22 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-10 01:47 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking China Blue Dolls <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-10 02:47 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-07-10 06:04 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking China Blue Dolls <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-10 03:29 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-10 20:52 +0300
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-07-10 23:29 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-10 04:44 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-07-12 11:33 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-12 04:17 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-07-12 12:33 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-12 05:24 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-07-12 21:45 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-07-12 05:25 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-12 10:21 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-12 23:54 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-07-12 19:14 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-07-13 00:20 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-12 09:26 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2011-07-12 10:52 -0600
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-07-12 10:48 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-12 16:54 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-12 11:35 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-12 10:13 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-07-12 21:53 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-14 23:41 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-15 10:56 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-15 21:27 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking bugbear <bugbear@trim_papermule.co.uk_trim> - 2011-07-20 09:22 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-20 10:51 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking gordonb.3urm7@burditt.org (Gordon Burditt) - 2011-07-20 15:39 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2011-07-21 12:12 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-07-10 09:28 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-07-10 06:52 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-07-10 14:47 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-14 23:07 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-07-10 12:25 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-10 10:47 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-11 07:58 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-07-11 10:48 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-11 14:40 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-11 14:54 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-11 15:55 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-07-11 21:51 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-11 21:31 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-07-11 23:16 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-12 06:28 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2011-07-24 22:13 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Lew Pitcher <lpitcher@teksavvy.com> - 2011-07-25 10:24 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-07-12 09:05 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-12 02:22 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-07-12 11:34 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-07-12 03:04 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-12 03:33 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-12 08:29 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-07-12 13:18 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-12 11:39 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-12 12:38 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-12 13:20 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-12 13:23 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-12 21:08 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-12 14:48 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-12 15:24 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-12 16:09 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-13 10:38 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-13 11:00 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-13 12:16 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-13 13:10 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-13 13:21 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-07-13 13:41 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-14 21:10 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-07-15 11:57 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-07-15 04:36 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Niklas Holsti <niklas.holsti@tidorum.invalid> - 2011-08-13 21:54 +0300
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking tm <thomas.mertes@gmx.at> - 2011-07-13 00:52 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-13 07:45 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Wolfgang Draxinger <wdraxinger@darkstargames.de> - 2011-09-08 21:02 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Wolfgang Draxinger <wdraxinger@darkstargames.de> - 2011-09-08 21:12 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2011-09-08 19:15 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Wolfgang Draxinger <wdraxinger@darkstargames.de> - 2011-09-08 22:24 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-07-08 00:30 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-07-08 01:29 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-08 07:38 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-07-08 20:40 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-08 18:17 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-07-08 19:49 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-08 22:26 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Peter Duniho <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> - 2011-07-08 17:42 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-07-09 10:21 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-10 10:53 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-10 18:07 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-10 11:29 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-10 19:22 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 16:40 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-21 23:06 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 19:38 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Henderson <h1@g1.f1> - 2011-07-22 00:27 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-22 13:00 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-10 17:17 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-08 10:23 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-07-08 19:30 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-11 08:04 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 16:43 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-15 00:28 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-18 23:09 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-15 00:14 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-15 07:00 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-15 08:09 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-20 22:07 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-15 23:29 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-15 22:26 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-16 00:32 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-16 11:00 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-16 11:15 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-16 15:41 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-16 23:18 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-17 00:30 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-07-16 08:39 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-16 10:33 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-16 15:51 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-17 08:46 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-18 07:03 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-18 06:21 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-16 15:43 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-07-17 09:50 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-17 08:15 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-07-18 01:12 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 16:50 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-18 06:56 -0500
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-18 19:26 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-18 15:03 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-20 22:16 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Henderson <h1@g1.f1> - 2011-07-20 22:25 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-21 08:50 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 07:37 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 16:52 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-21 12:19 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 16:54 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-21 14:46 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 18:10 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-21 23:22 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-07-21 21:47 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-23 10:15 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-16 10:46 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-16 11:13 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-20 22:09 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-20 21:01 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-07-21 07:05 -0300
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-07-21 06:28 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-21 12:32 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 16:58 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-21 15:58 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 19:14 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-22 13:07 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-22 17:33 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-22 13:36 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-22 23:16 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-22 16:50 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-23 20:09 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-24 08:56 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-23 09:37 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-23 11:23 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-07-23 12:04 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-23 14:45 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-23 11:51 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-07-23 22:39 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-07-25 10:20 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations <supercalifragilisticexpialadiamaticonormalizeringelimatisticantations@averylongandannoyingdomainname.com> - 2011-07-25 13:29 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-25 13:35 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-23 09:39 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-23 21:09 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-23 21:24 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 16:57 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-20 22:12 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-07-21 06:41 -0300
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 16:38 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-06 22:28 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Wanja Gayk <brixomatic@yahoo.com> - 2011-07-06 22:30 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-07-06 22:32 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking rop rop <rop049@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 00:30 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2011-07-07 07:54 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking rop rop <rop049@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 05:36 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-07-07 19:11 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Tom Anderson <twic@urchin.earth.li> - 2011-07-07 14:21 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Stanimir Stamenkov <s7an10@netscape.net> - 2011-07-09 16:34 +0300
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-07-06 22:41 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-07 14:34 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-07 14:53 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-07 17:12 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-07 17:29 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-08 10:27 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-08 13:15 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-19 20:54 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-19 18:07 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-19 21:31 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-07-20 07:36 -0300
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking RedGrittyBrick <RedGrittyBrick@spamweary.invalid> - 2011-07-20 11:58 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-20 09:51 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking RedGrittyBrick <RedGrittyBrick@spamweary.invalid> - 2011-07-21 12:11 +0100
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-21 12:43 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Tom McGlynn <taqmcglynn@googlemail.com> - 2011-07-21 07:15 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 07:35 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-21 15:38 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-21 09:03 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-07-21 12:00 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-22 17:16 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-23 11:28 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-23 21:03 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Henderson <h1@g1.f1> - 2011-07-23 22:55 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-24 09:16 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-24 10:40 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-24 10:54 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-24 11:09 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-24 12:53 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking markspace <-@.> - 2011-07-24 15:15 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-24 15:41 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Henderson <h1@g1.f1> - 2011-07-25 03:21 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-25 00:56 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-07-25 07:03 -0300
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Thomas Richter <thor@math.tu-berlin.de> - 2011-07-26 09:43 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> - 2011-07-25 11:06 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Henderson <h1@g1.f1> - 2011-07-25 11:12 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-25 09:09 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-25 09:30 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-25 13:33 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2011-07-26 03:04 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-07-26 03:28 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Henderson <h1@g1.f1> - 2011-07-26 04:53 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-07-26 11:35 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-26 10:48 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 17:00 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-20 19:50 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom3minus1@eastlink.ca> - 2011-07-20 23:21 -0300
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2011-07-21 12:52 +0000
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Henderson <h1@g1.f1> - 2011-07-21 15:58 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-21 17:06 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-20 14:35 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-20 18:22 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-21 14:54 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking rop rop <rop049@gmail.com> - 2011-07-08 15:34 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-11 08:09 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-07-11 10:30 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-11 14:43 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Joshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2011-07-11 14:49 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Daniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid> - 2011-07-17 17:14 +0200
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking David Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca> - 2011-07-18 19:28 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> - 2011-07-18 16:36 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-19 21:33 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-19 20:56 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-20 14:36 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2011-07-20 18:24 -0400
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> - 2011-07-21 14:55 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2011-07-06 22:43 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2011-07-07 14:56 +0300
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-07-08 21:27 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking "Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org> - 2011-07-08 21:57 -0700
Re: Arithmetic overflow checking lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2011-07-09 12:16 -0700
Page 7 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 14 Next page →
| From | "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-08 19:30 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nospam-F5163A.19300908072011@news.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #5989 |
In article <t0fe17do5p4qslksigd5fmgbsbg7l3hk9n@4ax.com>, Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote: > On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 17:51:06 -0700, Peter Duniho > <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> wrote: > > [snip] > > >I would not worry about the "simple" or "efficient" criteria. IMHO, > >if one is deciding to apply overflow checking to every computation, > >one has already abandoned the hope of efficiency. > > Not necessarily. If a rocket ends up being destroyed as a result, > having the computing go a bit slower to save having to build another > rocket would have been more efficient. Unfortunately, this is not a > made-up example. See: > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_5_Flight_501> > In the subsequent investigation, the cause of the problem was > recreated. > > Turn on those run-time checks unless speed *REALLY* is of paramount > importance. It usually is not. The software was designed for one system but used in another system without adequate testing. In particular, s) It would have been technically feasible to include almost the entire inertial reference system in the overall system simulations which were performed. For a number of reasons it was decided to use the simulated output of the inertial reference system, not the system itself or its detailed simulation. Had the system been included, the failure could have been detected. The full report may be seen here: <http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ariane_501_Inquiry_Board_report> -- John B. Matthews trashgod at gmail dot com <http://sites.google.com/site/drjohnbmatthews>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-11 08:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <v34m17tduq0gfj7hvigfaok54lmguldbpf@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #6001 |
On Fri, 08 Jul 2011 19:30:09 -0400, "John B. Matthews"
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>In article <t0fe17do5p4qslksigd5fmgbsbg7l3hk9n@4ax.com>,
> Gene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net> wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 17:51:06 -0700, Peter Duniho
>> <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> wrote:
>>
>> [snip]
>>
>> >I would not worry about the "simple" or "efficient" criteria. IMHO,
>> >if one is deciding to apply overflow checking to every computation,
>> >one has already abandoned the hope of efficiency.
>>
>> Not necessarily. If a rocket ends up being destroyed as a result,
>> having the computing go a bit slower to save having to build another
>> rocket would have been more efficient. Unfortunately, this is not a
>> made-up example. See:
>
>> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_5_Flight_501>
>
>> In the subsequent investigation, the cause of the problem was
>> recreated.
>>
>> Turn on those run-time checks unless speed *REALLY* is of paramount
>> importance. It usually is not.
>
>The software was designed for one system but used in another system
>without adequate testing. In particular,
>
>s) It would have been technically feasible to include almost the entire
>inertial reference system in the overall system simulations which were
>performed. For a number of reasons it was decided to use the simulated
>output of the inertial reference system, not the system itself or its
>detailed simulation. Had the system been included, the failure could
>have been detected.
And the subsystem that the error was in was neded for the Ariane
4 but not for the Ariane 5. Software reuse ended up biting hard.
>The full report may be seen here:
>
><http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Ariane_501_Inquiry_Board_report>
I have read a lot about that incident, though not as much as
about the THERAC-25 fiasco.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-21 16:43 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4e288f85$0$316$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #5989 |
On 7/8/2011 1:23 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote: > On Thu, 07 Jul 2011 17:51:06 -0700, Peter Duniho > <NpOeStPeAdM@NnOwSlPiAnMk.com> wrote: >> I would not worry about the "simple" or "efficient" criteria. IMHO, if >> one is deciding to apply overflow checking to every computation, one has >> already abandoned the hope of efficiency. > > Not necessarily. If a rocket ends up being destroyed as a > result, having the computing go a bit slower to save having to build > another rocket would have been more efficient. I am pretty sure that Peter was talking about the efficiency of the computer program. > Unfortunately, this is > not a made-up example. See: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ariane_5_Flight_501 > In the subsequent investigation, the cause of the problem was > recreated. It was an integer overflow. But the real problem was a bad software process. If there had not been an integer overflow there could have been many other types of problems. > Turn on those run-time checks unless speed *REALLY* is of > paramount importance. It usually is not. I would agree with that. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-15 00:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ivokf0$p8k$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #5976 |
Peter Duniho wrote: > On 7/7/11 10:02 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> On 7/7/2011 7:11 AM, Peter Duniho wrote: >>> On 7/6/11 10:16 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>> On 7/6/2011 8:35 AM, rop rop wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> If I want to have arithmetic-overflow checking in all parts of an >>>>> application, >>>>> what is the most practical, simple, efficient way to achieve this? >>>> >>>> Write the application in Ada. >>> >>> Or use C#, which has the same feature, but is a lot more like Java >>> otherwise. >>> >>> That said, I suspect Tom's guess is correct and a language-change >>> just to achieve this goal isn't going to be the practical choice. >> >> Like most design decisions, it is a trade-off. If Tom *needs* >> overflow checking, the most practical, simple, efficient way to >> achieve it is to use a language that is designed to support overflow >> checking. > > To be clear, I don't think _Tom_ needs or doesn't need this. He was > simply replying to the OP. > >> If he merely *wants* overflow checking, the best choice may be to >> stick to Java and drop general overflow checking. That does not >> prevent having e.g. a BigInteger subclass that takes a range as a >> constructor parameter and does overflow checking against that range. > > I don't disagree with that. In fact, I'm skeptical that in any > program it really makes sense to apply overflow checking to _every_ > computation, even not counting the issues that have already been > pointed out wrt the JDK itself and other libraries which rely on the > lack of it. For example, does every integral "for" loop _really_ > need the index increment operation to be checked for overflow? Seems > unlikely to me. It's Java. Why worry about performance?! And how expensive really is it? Instead of just increment, increment and check the hardware overflow flag. (Oops, did I say "hardware" in a Java NG? My bad). > > While the discussion has been interesting, I can't help but feel that > the original question is fundamentally flawed. The answers are mostly > academic, as it's unlikely anyone really ought to be trying to > approach the problem in this way in the first place. It's as easy as setting a compiler switch in some languages (not in C or C++ though, but C#, e.g.), so the approach seems sound and desireable for a language to implement. The programmer shouldn't be overly burdened with the task of overflow checking. > >> I have not yet seen an option for getting general overflow checking >> in Java, without getting false hits on code that depends on the JLS >> specified arithmetic behavior, that is at all practical, simple, or >> efficient. > > Well, I think Tom's suggestion of some sort of automatic code-rewriter > _could_ be the best solution in _certain_ scenarios. Such an > implementation could be applied selectively to specific code. > > I would not worry about the "simple" or "efficient" criteria. IMHO, > if one is deciding to apply overflow checking to every computation, > one has already abandoned the hope of efficiency. I don't think that is true. It depends on the application of course, but for most programs, wouldn't a single-digit performance hit be acceptable? (OK, maybe not on already slow Java ;) ). > Frankly, as long as the discussion is purely hypothetical (as it is > now), I don't see how anyone can claim with 100% certainty the broad > superiority or inferiority of any given solution. It's too dependent > on the specifics of whatever real-world scenario is at hand. > I think the issue has achieved critical mass (programmers, not just comp scientists) now and every language needs to "keep up with the Joneses" (C#) to stay relevant.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-18 23:09 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4e24f56b$0$312$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #5965 |
On 7/7/2011 10:11 AM, Peter Duniho wrote: > On 7/6/11 10:16 AM, Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> On 7/6/2011 8:35 AM, rop rop wrote: >>> If I want to have arithmetic-overflow checking in all parts of an >>> application, >>> what is the most practical, simple, efficient way to achieve this? >> >> Write the application in Ada. > > Or use C#, which has the same feature, but is a lot more like Java > otherwise. But if he does not want to switch runtime - either due to runtime availability or existing libraries, then I have more faith in JGnat than in GrassHopper. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-15 00:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ivoiap$gru$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #5915 |
Patricia Shanahan wrote: > On 7/6/2011 8:35 AM, rop rop wrote: >> Hi, >> >> If I want to have arithmetic-overflow checking in all parts of an >> application, >> what is the most practical, simple, efficient way to achieve this? > > Write the application in Ada. > > Patricia But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the compiler-level equivalent, so C# would be the better alternative. (And yes, I do know you were just kidding about Ada).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-15 07:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <drmdnTkz1raR1b3TnZ2dnUVZ_q-dnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #6201 |
On 7/14/2011 10:14 PM, MikeP wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> On 7/6/2011 8:35 AM, rop rop wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> If I want to have arithmetic-overflow checking in all parts of an >>> application, >>> what is the most practical, simple, efficient way to achieve this? >> >> Write the application in Ada. >> >> Patricia > > But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the compiler-level > equivalent, so C# would be the better alternative. (And yes, I do know > you were just kidding about Ada). > > No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all the languages that would meet the stated requirement. I'm very strongly of the opinion different languages should provide different features, making different trade-offs, and programmers should pick the language for a job based on its requirements and those features. The alternative a lot of programmers follow seems to be to pick one language, ignore all the others, and then complain when there is a mismatch between that language's features and their current requirements. I have no problem with pushing minor changes and additional features within the general framework of a language, but if the basic framework is not a good match for a job, the solution is to pick a language that is more suitable. Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-15 08:09 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b452167b-c67f-46bd-b811-d202e587ca14@f39g2000prb.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #6207 |
Patricia Shanahan wrote: > MikeP wrote: >> Patricia Shanahan wrote: ... >>> Write the application in Ada. > > >> Patricia > > > But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the compiler-level > > equivalent, so C# would be the better alternative. (And yes, I do know > > you were just kidding about Ada). > > No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all the > languages that would meet the stated requirement. > Others did not think you were joking. I've known people who use Ada professionally and not one complained about the language. I've only ever encountered disparagement of Ada from people who don't use it. I've never worked with Ada, so I defer to those who have. > I'm very strongly of the opinion different languages should provide > different features, making different trade-offs, and programmers should > pick the language for a job based on its requirements and those features. > > The alternative a lot of programmers follow seems to be to pick one > language, ignore all the others, and then complain when there is a > mismatch between that language's features and their current requirements. > > I have no problem with pushing minor changes and additional features > within the general framework of a language, but if the basic framework > is not a good match for a job, the solution is to pick a language that > is more suitable. > +1 -- Lew
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-20 22:07 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4e2789df$0$309$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> |
| In reply to | #6211 |
On 7/15/2011 11:09 AM, lewbloch wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> MikeP wrote: >>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: > ... >>>> Write the application in Ada. >> >>>> Patricia >> >>> But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the compiler-level >>> equivalent, so C# would be the better alternative. (And yes, I do know >>> you were just kidding about Ada). >> >> No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all the >> languages that would meet the stated requirement. >> > > Others did not think you were joking. I've known people who use Ada > professionally and not one complained about the language. I've only > ever encountered disparagement of Ada from people who don't use it. > > I've never worked with Ada, so I defer to those who have. Ada is a very nice language. Or maybe I should say that Ada83 was a very nice language. Ada95 extended a procedural language to be object oriented. And I don't think the result is so nice. It is obviously a very powerful language. But it is also a very difficult language to learn and master. Arne
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-15 23:29 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ivr43p$7cq$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #6207 |
Patricia Shanahan wrote: > On 7/14/2011 10:14 PM, MikeP wrote: >> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>> On 7/6/2011 8:35 AM, rop rop wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> If I want to have arithmetic-overflow checking in all parts of an >>>> application, >>>> what is the most practical, simple, efficient way to achieve this? >>> >>> Write the application in Ada. >>> >>> Patricia >> >> But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the >> compiler-level equivalent, so C# would be the better alternative. >> (And yes, I do know you were just kidding about Ada). >> >> > > No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all the > languages that would meet the stated requirement. Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended Ada to a Java programmer! Oh my. > > I'm very strongly of the opinion different languages should provide > different features, making different trade-offs, and programmers > should pick the language for a job based on its requirements and > those features. You have to admit, it's quite a chasm between Java/C# and Ada. > The alternative a lot of programmers follow seems to be to pick one > language, I do/did that. (C++ is my poison). > ignore all the others, I have regularly looked at other languages and used them in minor ways for evaluation. > and then complain when there is a > mismatch between that language's features and their current > requirements. In another post, I said that I think that today (like in right now) the awareness of the overflow issue (language support) has achieved critical mass. Combine that with the alternatives that are available and more yet to come, a language cannot afford to go the path of, say, C anymore for it will lose relevance much more quickly. It's not complaining. It's customer feedback (companies BEG their customers for such!). Companies that don't recognize their customers needs and change with the times, go out of business. Java is not C and can't afford to stagnate like C did (OK, C++ gave it a "reconditioning"), or it won't last. > > I have no problem with pushing minor changes and additional features > within the general framework of a language, but if the basic framework > is not a good match for a job, the solution is to pick a language that > is more suitable. C# will fit in a lot of places where Java does (or so I assume given what I know about them, as I'm don't use either language other than for evaluation and case study). Pushing away programmers to other languages instead of evolving the language according to the expectations (i.e., what programmers have come to expect to be standard feature in a given class of language) is surely a path to obsolescence.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-15 22:26 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <EY2dnXOFy8BmvbzTnZ2dnUVZ_qWdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #6219 |
On 7/15/2011 9:29 PM, MikeP wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> On 7/14/2011 10:14 PM, MikeP wrote: >>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>> On 7/6/2011 8:35 AM, rop rop wrote: >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> If I want to have arithmetic-overflow checking in all parts of an >>>>> application, >>>>> what is the most practical, simple, efficient way to achieve this? >>>> >>>> Write the application in Ada. >>>> >>>> Patricia >>> >>> But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the >>> compiler-level equivalent, so C# would be the better alternative. >>> (And yes, I do know you were just kidding about Ada). >>> >>> >> >> No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all the >> languages that would meet the stated requirement. > > Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended Ada to a > Java programmer! Oh my. Huh? Java, like any healthy programming language, is a tool, not a religion. Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-16 00:32 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ivr7q2$lnf$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #6221 |
Patricia Shanahan wrote: > On 7/15/2011 9:29 PM, MikeP wrote: >> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>> On 7/14/2011 10:14 PM, MikeP wrote: >>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>> On 7/6/2011 8:35 AM, rop rop wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> If I want to have arithmetic-overflow checking in all parts of an >>>>>> application, >>>>>> what is the most practical, simple, efficient way to achieve >>>>>> this? >>>>> >>>>> Write the application in Ada. >>>>> >>>>> Patricia >>>> >>>> But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the >>>> compiler-level equivalent, so C# would be the better alternative. >>>> (And yes, I do know you were just kidding about Ada). >>>> >>>> >>> >>> No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all >>> the languages that would meet the stated requirement. >> >> Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended Ada >> to a Java programmer! Oh my. > > Huh? Java, like any healthy programming language, is a tool, not a > religion. Just like a dentist's drill and an oil well drill are tools?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-16 11:00 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <3282bfa8-227b-4590-a830-67d9df0a4d1c@t8g2000prm.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #6222 |
"MikeP" wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> MikeP wrote: >>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>> MikeP wrote: >>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>> Write the application in Ada. > >>>>> But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the >>>>> compiler-level equivalent, so C# would be the better alternative. >>>>> (And yes, I do know you were just kidding about Ada). > >>>> No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all >>>> the languages that would meet the stated requirement. > >>> Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended Ada >>> to a Java programmer! Oh my. > >> Huh? Java, like any healthy programming language, is a tool, not a >> religion. > > Just like a dentist's drill and an oil well [sic] drill are tools? > Yes, exactly. Both of those are tools, and neither of those are religions. -- Lew
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-16 11:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <bo-dnfz-7t3_SLzTnZ2dnUVZ_oqdnZ2d@earthlink.com> |
| In reply to | #6232 |
On 7/16/2011 11:00 AM, lewbloch wrote: > "MikeP" wrote: >> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>> MikeP wrote: >>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>> MikeP wrote: >>>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>> Write the application in Ada. >> >>>>>> But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the >>>>>> compiler-level equivalent, so C# would be the better alternative. >>>>>> (And yes, I do know you were just kidding about Ada). >> >>>>> No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all >>>>> the languages that would meet the stated requirement. >> >>>> Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended Ada >>>> to a Java programmer! Oh my. >> >>> Huh? Java, like any healthy programming language, is a tool, not a >>> religion. >> >> Just like a dentist's drill and an oil well [sic] drill are tools? >> > > Yes, exactly. Both of those are tools, and neither of those are > religions. And it would be just as pointless to complain about the dental drill taking too long to drill a thousand foot well as to complain about the oil well drill being too big to fit in a patient's mouth. It's much better to look at the job and pick the tool that is most suitable for it. Patricia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-16 15:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ivst1r$oks$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #6234 |
Patricia Shanahan wrote: > On 7/16/2011 11:00 AM, lewbloch wrote: >> "MikeP" wrote: >>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>> MikeP wrote: >>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>> MikeP wrote: >>>>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>>> Write the application in Ada. >>> >>>>>>> But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the >>>>>>> compiler-level equivalent, so C# would be the better >>>>>>> alternative. (And yes, I do know you were just kidding about >>>>>>> Ada). >>> >>>>>> No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all >>>>>> the languages that would meet the stated requirement. >>> >>>>> Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended >>>>> Ada to a Java programmer! Oh my. >>> >>>> Huh? Java, like any healthy programming language, is a tool, not a >>>> religion. >>> >>> Just like a dentist's drill and an oil well [sic] drill are tools? >>> >> >> Yes, exactly. Both of those are tools, and neither of those are >> religions. > > And it would be just as pointless to complain about the dental drill > taking too long to drill a thousand foot well as to complain about the > oil well drill being too big to fit in a patient's mouth. It's much > better to look at the job and pick the tool that is most suitable for > it. I found it bizarre that you recommended an oil well drill to a dentist.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andreas Leitgeb <avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-16 23:18 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnj24732.phi.avl@gamma.logic.tuwien.ac.at> |
| In reply to | #6237 |
MikeP <mp011011@some.org> wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> On 7/16/2011 11:00 AM, lewbloch wrote: >>> "MikeP" wrote: >>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>> MikeP wrote: >>>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>> MikeP wrote: >>>>>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>>>> Write the application in Ada. >>>> >>>>>>>> But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the >>>>>>>> compiler-level equivalent, so C# would be the better >>>>>>>> alternative. (And yes, I do know you were just kidding about >>>>>>>> Ada). >>>> >>>>>>> No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all >>>>>>> the languages that would meet the stated requirement. >>>> >>>>>> Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended >>>>>> Ada to a Java programmer! Oh my. >>>> >>>>> Huh? Java, like any healthy programming language, is a tool, not a >>>>> religion. >>>> >>>> Just like a dentist's drill and an oil well [sic] drill are tools? >>>> >>> >>> Yes, exactly. Both of those are tools, and neither of those are >>> religions. >> >> And it would be just as pointless to complain about the dental drill >> taking too long to drill a thousand foot well as to complain about the >> oil well drill being too big to fit in a patient's mouth. It's much >> better to look at the job and pick the tool that is most suitable for >> it. > I found it bizarre that you recommended an oil well drill to a dentist. That's just, because the dentist expressed a need to exploit the oil well in his backyard.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-17 00:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ivts25$pcg$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #6240 |
Andreas Leitgeb wrote: > MikeP <mp011011@some.org> wrote: >> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>> On 7/16/2011 11:00 AM, lewbloch wrote: >>>> "MikeP" wrote: >>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>> MikeP wrote: >>>>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>>> MikeP wrote: >>>>>>>>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Write the application in Ada. >>>>> >>>>>>>>> But C# is very Java-like and has "checked" and also the >>>>>>>>> compiler-level equivalent, so C# would be the better >>>>>>>>> alternative. (And yes, I do know you were just kidding about >>>>>>>>> Ada). >>>>> >>>>>>>> No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find >>>>>>>> all the languages that would meet the stated requirement. >>>>> >>>>>>> Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended >>>>>>> Ada to a Java programmer! Oh my. >>>>> >>>>>> Huh? Java, like any healthy programming language, is a tool, not >>>>>> a religion. >>>>> >>>>> Just like a dentist's drill and an oil well [sic] drill are tools? >>>>> >>>> >>>> Yes, exactly. Both of those are tools, and neither of those are >>>> religions. >>> >>> And it would be just as pointless to complain about the dental drill >>> taking too long to drill a thousand foot well as to complain about >>> the oil well drill being too big to fit in a patient's mouth. It's >>> much better to look at the job and pick the tool that is most >>> suitable for it. >> I found it bizarre that you recommended an oil well drill to a >> dentist. > > That's just, because the dentist expressed a need to exploit the oil > well in his backyard. He did not. He wanted to provide better care to his patients.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "John B. Matthews" <nospam@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-16 08:39 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <nospam-B4FC24.08391616072011@news.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #6219 |
In article <ivr43p$7cq$1@dont-email.me>, "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> wrote: > Patricia Shanahan wrote: [...] > > No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all > > the languages that would meet the stated requirement. > > Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended Ada > to a Java programmer! Oh my. I often suggest Ada to Java programmers; knowledgeable Java programmers often return the favor; I've learned a lot that way. > > I'm very strongly of the opinion different languages should provide > > different features, making different trade-offs, and programmers > > should pick the language for a job based on its requirements and > > those features. > > You have to admit, it's quite a chasm between Java/C# and Ada. I find points of comparison very illuminating. Perhaps "chasm" is a matter of perspective. > > The alternative a lot of programmers follow seems to be to pick one > > language, > > I do/did that. (C++ is my poison). See also: "The science of fanboyism." Article: <http://techreport.com/discussions.x/21294> Discussion: <http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/07/15/1331243> -- John B. Matthews trashgod at gmail dot com <http://sites.google.com/site/drjohnbmatthews>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | lewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-16 10:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ee4670da-5a5d-4ce2-bbbd-08284219baf6@p12g2000pre.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #6224 |
John B. Matthews wrote: > "MikeP" wrote: >> Patricia Shanahan wrote: > [...] >>> No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all >>> the languages that would meet the stated requirement. > >> Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended Ada >> to a Java programmer! Oh my. > Oh, your what? What are you acting so shocked about? Give us logic, evidence, reasoning, not just superficial rhetorical devices. What in bloody blazes is so strange about recommending Ada to a Java programmer, hm? Nothing! Let's be an engineer, "MikeP", hm-k? > I often suggest Ada to Java programmers; knowledgeable Java programmers > often return the favor; I've learned a lot that way. > >>> I'm very strongly of the opinion different languages should provide >>> different features, making different trade-offs, and programmers >>> should pick the language for a job based on its requirements and >>> those features. > >> You have to admit, it's quite a chasm between Java/C# and Ada. > Be specific. No one has to admit that. As the person making the claim, the burden of proof is on you, "MikeP". Demonstrate your point, please. Define "chasm", how to measure it, and what makes the difference "quite" a chasm. > I find points of comparison very illuminating. Perhaps "chasm" is a > matter of perspective. > Perhaps "quite a chasm" is a matter of someone wanting to sound impressive who has no facts or reasoning behind their argument, so they make little unsupportable foolish comments full of "nudge, nudge, wink, wink" instead. >>> The alternative a lot of programmers follow seems to be to pick one >>> language, > Not the good ones, nor the ones who wish to stay employed. >> I do/did that. (C++ is my poison). > > See also: "The science of fanboyism." > Article: <http://techreport.com/discussions.x/21294> > Discussion: <http://science.slashdot.org/story/11/07/15/1331243> > C'mon, "MikeP", this is a programmers' group. Give us more than tabloid gossip-column rhetoric, please. -- Lew
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-07-16 15:51 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ivstlr$sjk$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #6231 |
lewbloch wrote: > John B. Matthews wrote: >> "MikeP" wrote: >>> Patricia Shanahan wrote: >> [...] >>>> No, I was not really joking, though I did not attempt to find all >>>> the languages that would meet the stated requirement. >> >>> Don't look now, but if you weren't joking, then you recommended Ada >>> to a Java programmer! Oh my. >> > > Oh, your what? What are you acting so shocked about? That Patricia recommended "an oil well drill to a dentist". I did not think the concept was obtuse. >>>> I'm very strongly of the opinion different languages should provide >>>> different features, making different trade-offs, and programmers >>>> should pick the language for a job based on its requirements and >>>> those features. >> >>> You have to admit, it's quite a chasm between Java/C# and Ada. >> > > Be specific. No one has to admit that. As the person making the > claim, the burden of proof is on you, "MikeP". Demonstrate your > point, please. Define "chasm", how to measure it, and what makes the > difference "quite" a chasm. You are on a witch-hunt so I'll bid you farewell (as in buh-bye, I don't do pee-pee measuring contests). > >> I find points of comparison very illuminating. Perhaps "chasm" is a >> matter of perspective. >> > > Perhaps "quite a chasm" is a matter of someone wanting to sound > impressive who has no facts or reasoning behind their argument, so > they make little unsupportable foolish comments full of "nudge, nudge, > wink, wink" instead. Don't look now but your EQ (lack of) is showing. > > C'mon, "MikeP", this is a programmers' group. Give us more than > tabloid gossip-column rhetoric, please. I really have no advice to those who are proverbial "bit heads" other than maybe enroll in a few Humanities classes? Now, if you want to grow up and have some post-adolescent discourse, fine. Else just puh-leeeze, go away!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 14 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer
csiph-web