Le 2014-10-22 10:24, Martin.J Thompson a écrit : > Thanks Tristan, I'll add your comments to the Twiki page. Should I > put your name in the Opposers list (yet? :) > > Just one note on the range of integers - the proposal is that the > standard now *does* define the range of an integer. In past > discussions we have rejected changing the range of INTEGER as too much > past code may be (non-portably, but still...) dependent on it. > > Thanks, > Martin In a sense, using the modular type shields us from having to deal with these standards grey areas. And this would automatically adjust every result of a bool/shift operation, preventing coding mistakes and keeping the source code easy to read. However, bool/shift are also desirable for integers, as I've illustrated in my last message. Having both would allow the coders to choose the type that best suits their needs for each case. YG -- This message has been scanned for viruses and dangerous content by MailScanner, and is believed to be clean.Received on Wed Oct 22 02:11:04 2014
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Wed Oct 22 2014 - 02:11:08 PDT