Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #5905 > unrolled thread

Arithmetic overflow checking

Started byrop rop <rop049@gmail.com>
First post2011-07-06 08:35 -0700
Last post2011-07-09 12:16 -0700
Articles 17 on this page of 277 — 46 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer


Contents

  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 14 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14]


#6073

FromGene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net>
Date2011-07-11 08:09 -0700
Message-ID<ha4m17lfvbh9aia1a2uacjqo5hcln89u4l@4ax.com>
In reply to#5999
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 15:34:58 -0700 (PDT), rop rop <rop049@gmail.com>
wrote:

[snip]

>Yes, I am sure we all know that it IS 100% per the Java-spec -- no
>need to point out that...

     And as if it excuses it.  There is a reason why we have specs. It
is to specify desired behaviour, not be a straitjacket forevermore.

>That being said, I personally think it must be one of the most epic
>design errors in software-history, to DELIBERATELY design a
>programming-language this way.
>To me its like... WHAT THE H*** WERE THEY THINKING? :)

     Exactly.

>I mean, it's fine if you have an OPTION for users to turn off overflow-
>checking, for performance reasons, or whatever other reason someone
>can dream up.
>
>BUT, to make it so difficult for users that (as far as I have been
>googling up) after 15+years of Java-evolution and refinement, still
>NOBODY has came up with a simple and robust way of including such an
>extremely basic "feature" for a software-language.
>
>I am a big fan of Java and the "echo-system" around it and all the fun
>we're having with it every day -- this one being the only BIG
>EXCEPTION I can think of.
>What I would hope for is that, still, at some point in the future,
>there will actually be an OPTION in the JVM to turn on overflow-
>checking.
>That way, it can be adopted by users who really value robust and bug-
>free software, without breaking backwards compatibility with existing
>code.

     I would rather have it the other way around.  Safety first.  Make
the option on by default.  If someone really needs the additional
speed and judges the risk is acceptable, then that person can flip the
switch and maybe get sued into the ground if he gets it wrong.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6076

FromJoshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid>
Date2011-07-11 10:30 -0700
Message-ID<ivfbvm$iu5$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#6073
On 7/11/2011 8:09 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>       I would rather have it the other way around.  Safety first.  Make
> the option on by default.  If someone really needs the additional
> speed and judges the risk is acceptable, then that person can flip the
> switch and maybe get sued into the ground if he gets it wrong.

The problem with arithmetic overflow is that it's not really adding any 
safety. Sure, having 2^30 + 2^30 be a value less than 0 is wrong, but 
often times the 2^30 value in the first place is just as wrong. Not to 
mention that sometimes people fake unsigned integer types, in which case 
2 - 1 is an invalid value--how is the compiler supposed to know that 
this value is really an unsigned value? Note that this would break, 
e.g., java.util.Arrays.binarySearch.

What you really need is checked ranges, not automatic overflow checking.

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not 
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6085

FromGene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net>
Date2011-07-11 14:43 -0700
Message-ID<ffrm171jqbq00bqgcien2jb87jo2l7a407@4ax.com>
In reply to#6076
On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 10:30:26 -0700, Joshua Cranmer
<Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> wrote:

>On 7/11/2011 8:09 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>>       I would rather have it the other way around.  Safety first.  Make
>> the option on by default.  If someone really needs the additional
>> speed and judges the risk is acceptable, then that person can flip the
>> switch and maybe get sued into the ground if he gets it wrong.
>
>The problem with arithmetic overflow is that it's not really adding any 
>safety. Sure, having 2^30 + 2^30 be a value less than 0 is wrong, but 
>often times the 2^30 value in the first place is just as wrong. Not to 
>mention that sometimes people fake unsigned integer types, in which case 
>2 - 1 is an invalid value--how is the compiler supposed to know that 
>this value is really an unsigned value? Note that this would break, 
>e.g., java.util.Arrays.binarySearch.
>
>What you really need is checked ranges, not automatic overflow checking.

     We need both.  Either one would catch the problem above, but some
situations are vulnerable to only one.

     Going off the end of a small array would be caught by bounds
checking and not overflow checking.

     Averaging a set of numbers with a sum too big would be caught by
overflow checking and not bounds checking.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6086

FromJoshua Cranmer <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid>
Date2011-07-11 14:49 -0700
Message-ID<ivfr62$pcf$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#6085
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.

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not 
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6244

FromDaniele Futtorovic <da.futt.news@laposte-dot-net.invalid>
Date2011-07-17 17:14 +0200
Message-ID<ivuu9e$gsr$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#6086
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.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6271

FromDavid Lamb <dalamb@cs.queensu.ca>
Date2011-07-18 19:28 -0400
Message-ID<Pk3Vp.51460$eG6.1468@newsfe09.iad>
In reply to#6244
On 17/07/2011 11:14 AM, Daniele Futtorovic wrote:
> On 11/07/2011 23:49, Joshua Cranmer allegedly wrote:
>> 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?

I think the gist of some other discussion in this thread is that some 
computers have hardware detection and others don't.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6272

FromPatricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org>
Date2011-07-18 16:36 -0700
Message-ID<FbCdnaDXssnuXrnTnZ2dnUVZ_h6dnZ2d@earthlink.com>
In reply to#6271
On 7/18/2011 4:28 PM, David Lamb wrote:
> On 17/07/2011 11:14 AM, Daniele Futtorovic wrote:
>> On 11/07/2011 23:49, Joshua Cranmer allegedly wrote:
>>> 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?
>
> I think the gist of some other discussion in this thread is that some
> computers have hardware detection and others don't.

In a sense, most processors that could run a full Java installation
already have what they need.

In many case, range limited integer checking can be done at compile
time, because of the greater precision. Suppose, for example, you are
adding two one digit numbers. If each of them is in a [0,9], the
compiler knows that the result will fit in a [0,18]. If each is in a
byte, the compiler cannot know that their sum fits in a byte.

In the remaining cases, we are looking at comparisons involving
constants and values that are already in registers, and conditional
branches that go the same way somewhere between 99.9999% and 100% of the
time. The expensive operations are cache misses and mis-predicted
branches, and neither is likely in this case. The processor in a small
2011 PC is a supercomputer by historical standards, with the ability to
do multiple operations at the same time, if the data is available.

Patricia

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6298

FromArne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Date2011-07-19 21:33 -0400
Message-ID<4e263052$0$309$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
In reply to#6076
On 7/11/2011 1:30 PM, Joshua Cranmer wrote:
> On 7/11/2011 8:09 AM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>> I would rather have it the other way around. Safety first. Make
>> the option on by default. If someone really needs the additional
>> speed and judges the risk is acceptable, then that person can flip the
>> switch and maybe get sued into the ground if he gets it wrong.
>
> The problem with arithmetic overflow is that it's not really adding any
> safety. Sure, having 2^30 + 2^30 be a value less than 0 is wrong, but
> often times the 2^30 value in the first place is just as wrong. Not to
> mention that sometimes people fake unsigned integer types, in which case
> 2 - 1 is an invalid value--how is the compiler supposed to know that
> this value is really an unsigned value? Note that this would break,
> e.g., java.util.Arrays.binarySearch.
>
> What you really need is checked ranges, not automatic overflow checking.

Checked ranges would be nice too.

But check of whether integer arithmetic follows math rules could
still be nice standalone.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6295

FromArne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Date2011-07-19 20:56 -0400
Message-ID<4e2627bb$0$314$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
In reply to#5999
On 7/8/2011 6:34 PM, rop rop wrote:
> On Jul 8, 2:29 am, lewbloch<lewbl...@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>>       Exactly.  C does not do that sort of checking, and the meme has
>>> spread widely.  I would much prefer to have things blow up when wrong
>>> than not blow up.  It makes for smaller messes.
>>
>> the problem with that statement is that it's not wrong for Java
>> primitive integer types to wrap around.
>>
>> It is, in fact, wrong for them to throw an overflow exception, as many
>> have pointed out in this thread.
>
> Yes, I am sure we all know that it IS 100% per the Java-spec -- no
> need to point out that...

Yes yes.

> That being said, I personally think it must be one of the most epic
> design errors in software-history, to DELIBERATELY design a
> programming-language this way.
> To me its like... WHAT THE H*** WERE THEY THINKING? :)

The same as most other language designers.

How many mainstream languages do you know that detect integer
overflow?

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6315

FromGene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net>
Date2011-07-20 14:36 -0700
Message-ID<6hie271l0sdsh79ar021d2467k7t20juaj@4ax.com>
In reply to#6295
On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 20:56:26 -0400, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
wrote:

[snip]

>How many mainstream languages do you know that detect integer
>overflow?

     Visual Basic 6 managed.  In fact, it could be turned off if you
wanted but defaulted to on.

     I do not care how many languages have a certain flaw.  If it is a
flaw, it is a flaw.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6317

FromArne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Date2011-07-20 18:24 -0400
Message-ID<4e275589$0$310$14726298@news.sunsite.dk>
In reply to#6315
On 7/20/2011 5:36 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 20:56:26 -0400, Arne Vajhøj<arne@vajhoej.dk>
> wrote:

[snip back]
 >>> That being said, I personally think it must be one of the most epic
 >>> design errors in software-history, to DELIBERATELY design a
 >>> programming-language this way.
 >>> To me its like... WHAT THE H*** WERE THEY THINKING?
 >>>
 >>> The same as most other language designers.
[/snip back]

>> How many mainstream languages do you know that detect integer
>> overflow?
>
>       Visual Basic 6 managed.  In fact, it could be turned off if you
> wanted but defaulted to on.
>
>       I do not care how many languages have a certain flaw.  If it is a
> flaw, it is a flaw.

Irrelevant in the context.

Why don't you read what you are commenting on????

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6364

FromGene Wirchenko <genew@ocis.net>
Date2011-07-21 14:55 -0700
Message-ID<j18h27tsrlgjnoun1289e9681par6vfv2m@4ax.com>
In reply to#6317
On Wed, 20 Jul 2011 18:24:07 -0400, Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
wrote:

>On 7/20/2011 5:36 PM, Gene Wirchenko wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Jul 2011 20:56:26 -0400, Arne Vajhøj<arne@vajhoej.dk>
>> wrote:
>
>[snip back]
> >>> That being said, I personally think it must be one of the most epic
> >>> design errors in software-history, to DELIBERATELY design a
> >>> programming-language this way.
> >>> To me its like... WHAT THE H*** WERE THEY THINKING?
> >>>
> >>> The same as most other language designers.
>[/snip back]
>
>>> How many mainstream languages do you know that detect integer
>>> overflow?
>>
>>       Visual Basic 6 managed.  In fact, it could be turned off if you
>> wanted but defaulted to on.
>>
>>       I do not care how many languages have a certain flaw.  If it is a
>> flaw, it is a flaw.
>
>Irrelevant in the context.
>
>Why don't you read what you are commenting on????

     I do read it.  You are rather fond of calling things irrelvant.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#5955

FromRoedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid>
Date2011-07-06 22:43 -0700
Message-ID<8qha17tn8jegsnptlp9ei954offen8h1ej@4ax.com>
In reply to#5905
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 08:35:01 -0700 (PDT), rop rop <rop049@gmail.com>
wrote, quoted or indirectly quoted someone who said :

>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?
>Id like to clutter the code as little a possible...

If your hardware detects it, you could use some JNI and test the
status codes and return a object containing the result and overflow
info.  Slow though.
-- 
Roedy Green Canadian Mind Products
http://mindprod.com
One thing I love about having a website, is that when I complain about
something, I only have to do it once. It saves me endless hours of grumbling.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#5962

FromJukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid>
Date2011-07-07 14:56 +0300
Message-ID<m3sjqi2tk5.fsf@despammed.com>
In reply to#5905
rop rop <rop049@gmail.com> writes:

> 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?
> Id like to clutter the code as little a possible...

Without knowing anything about your application, I wonder if doing all
the arithmetics with the BigInteger class instead of the int or long
primitives would help. It shouldn't ever overflow according to the
javadocs.
Of course you may consider it not being practical and simple, and
at least changing all the primitive numbers would mean changes to the
code, but I haven't noticed any better suggestion so far.

-- 
Jukka Lahtinen

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6007

From"Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org>
Date2011-07-08 21:27 -0700
Message-ID<iv8lba$o2h$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#5905
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?
> Id like to clutter the code as little a possible...
> Is there any way to instruct the JVM to include it?

What? You mean you guys do not have this in Java??

It is a compiler option in Ada GNAT/gcc compiler:

http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.3.5/gnat_ugn_unw/Run_002dTime-Checks.html

"`-gnato'
     Enables overflow checking for integer operations. This causes
GNAT to generate slower and larger executable programs by adding
code to check for overflow (resulting in raising Constraint_Error as
required by standard Ada semantics)."

This is something that should be there in Java.

--Nasser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6009

From"Nasser M. Abbasi" <nma@12000.org>
Date2011-07-08 21:57 -0700
Message-ID<iv8n4l$r0t$1@speranza.aioe.org>
In reply to#6007
On 7/8/2011 9:27 PM, Nasser M. Abbasi 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?
>> Id like to clutter the code as little a possible...
>> Is there any way to instruct the JVM to include it?
>
> What? You mean you guys do not have this in Java??
>
> It is a compiler option in Ada GNAT/gcc compiler:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.3.5/gnat_ugn_unw/Run_002dTime-Checks.html
>
> "`-gnato'
>       Enables overflow checking for integer operations. This causes
> GNAT to generate slower and larger executable programs by adding
> code to check for overflow (resulting in raising Constraint_Error as
> required by standard Ada semantics)."
>
> This is something that should be there in Java.
>
> --Nasser

sorry, I see now this is mentioned in this thread. I replied before
reading the full thread.

--Nasser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#6019

Fromlewbloch <lewbloch@gmail.com>
Date2011-07-09 12:16 -0700
Message-ID<f5bff509-e2de-48e2-a368-06db8ea6b045@e20g2000prf.googlegroups.com>
In reply to#6007
"Nasser M. Abbasi" wrote:
> 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?
>> Id like to clutter the code as little a possible...
>> Is there any way to instruct the JVM to include it?
>

> What? You mean you guys do not have this in Java??
>
> It is a compiler option in Ada GNAT/gcc compiler:
>
> http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/gcc-4.3.5/gnat_ugn_unw/Run_002dTime-Che...
>
> "`-gnato'
>      Enables overflow checking for integer operations. This causes
> GNAT to generate slower and larger executable programs by adding
> code to check for overflow (resulting in raising Constraint_Error as
> required by standard Ada semantics)."
>
> This is something that should be there in Java.
>

Ada was mentioned upthread as a language with the feature.  Not only
we guys, but no one has this in Java, as the many posts upthread have
made quite clear.  In fact, the Java language specification
specifically excludes trapping overflow in integer operations.  As was
mentioned upthread by several folks.  Lots of posters have expressed
the opinion that the feature should be present in some form in Java.
The discussion has now progressed to the form such a feature could
take without breaking Java and all the Java programs out there.  Some
of the suggestions seem to be viable.

--
Lew

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 14 of 14 — ← Prev page 1 … 12 13 [14]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer


csiph-web