Should % ever "overflow"?

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 26 June 2016 at 05:44:53 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> Except for mathematica, these are all irrelevant. The claim is 
> that programming languages and CPU define % in some way, not 
> that mathematician do it the same way.

Well, the CPU does not define it. It is just that C botchered it 
by leaving "%" implementation defined up til 1999, where they 
went with the truncated reminder and not the floored modulo 
operator. In system level programming you usually need the modulo 
  (reminder for floored division) and not the C-style reminder 
(reminder from truncated division):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modulo_operation

Interestingly Simula, Ada, Fortran, Common Lisp and other high 
level languages provids both "rem(x,y)" and "mod(x,y)", which is 
the right thing to do.