Should % ever "overflow"?

Smoke Adams via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sat Jun 25 19:05:53 PDT 2016


On Sunday, 26 June 2016 at 00:31:29 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Saturday, 25 June 2016 at 23:01:00 UTC, "Smoke" Adams wrote:
>> This proves nothing.
>>
>
> This isn't a proof, this is a definition. This is the 
> definition that is used by all programming languages out there 
> and all CPUs. It isn't going to change because someone on the 
> internet think he has a better definition that provide no clear 
> advantage over the current one.

Again, no proof at all and inaccurate. Not every programming 
language or cpu does this. Please don't make up facts to support 
your "definitions" and desires. Having a negative modulo is just 
ignorant.





More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list