A little story

[Dmitry Olshansky]

On 25-Jun-12 15:21, Tobias Pankrath wrote:
> On Monday, 25 June 2012 at 10:08:03 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>> On 25-Jun-12 14:01, bearophile wrote:
>>> Tobias Pankrath:
>>>
>>>> Maybe you should post this to the main newsgroup.
>>>
>>> I don't know if the main newsgroup is the right place.
>>>
>>>
>>>> I would prefer a switch that does this per scope, i.e:
>>>
>>> I think both a compiler switch for the compilation unit, and a scope
>>> pragma to enable/disable locally, are useful.
>>
>> While I think that if you seek anything other then plain fixnum you'd
>> better make wrapper type adding nessary overflow checks. It should be
>> almost as fast as plain fixnum if it's not then it's a bug/feature
>> request for optimizer/inliner.
>
> If you have already written code, it may be cumbersome to port it to a
> wrapper type, if the only thing you want to test is, that it does not
> have overflows.
>
> You can't just do alias MyWrapper!int int; can you?

I surely can do s/int/Integer/.
>
> They are a common source of bugs, detecting those should be made easy. I
> do see this as automatic DbC for build-ins and can not see any counter
> argument that would not equally apply to the current DbC state.
>
> Except for the fact, that someone has to implement it.
>
>
>


-- 
Dmitry Olshansky