[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: integer overflow
From: |
Johan Bockgård |
Subject: |
Re: integer overflow |
Date: |
Sun, 07 Mar 2010 20:05:11 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.110011 (No Gnus v0.11) Emacs/23.1.93 (gnu/linux) |
Chong Yidong <address@hidden> writes:
> Glenn Morris <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> I don't really understand it. In a 32-bit Emacs:
>>
>> (1+ 536870911) -536870912
>> (+ 2 536870911) -536870911
>> (1+ 536870912) 536870913.0
>> (1+ 4294967295) overflow
>> (1+ 4294967295.0) 4294967296.0
>>
>> Can you summarize how it's supposed to work?
>
> The change affects the Lisp reader: reading "536870912" or any larger
> number now gives you a float Lisp object
or an error if the integer is larger than 32 bits, as the fourth example
shows.
- Re: Guile in Emacs, (continued)
- Re: Guile in Emacs, Ted Zlatanov, 2010/03/08
- Re: Guile in Emacs (was: integer overflow), Chad Brown, 2010/03/08
- Re: Guile in Emacs (was: integer overflow), Ken Raeburn, 2010/03/09
- Re: Guile in Emacs, Ted Zlatanov, 2010/03/09
- Re: Guile in Emacs, Ken Raeburn, 2010/03/10
- Re: Guile in Emacs, David Kastrup, 2010/03/10
- Re: Guile in Emacs (was: integer overflow), Richard Stallman, 2010/03/08
- Re: integer overflow, Helmut Eller, 2010/03/06
- Re: integer overflow, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/06
- Re: integer overflow, Richard Stallman, 2010/03/07
- Re: integer overflow,
Johan Bockgård <=
- Re: integer overflow, Chong Yidong, 2010/03/06
- Re: Next pretest, and branching plans, Christoph, 2010/03/13
- Re: Next pretest, and branching plans, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/13
- Re: Next pretest, and branching plans, Stefan Monnier, 2010/03/13
- Re: Next pretest, and branching plans, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/13
- Re: Next pretest, and branching plans, Jason Rumney, 2010/03/13
- Re: Next pretest, and branching plans, Christoph, 2010/03/13
- Re: Next pretest, and branching plans, Jason Rumney, 2010/03/13
- Re: Next pretest, and branching plans, Eli Zaretskii, 2010/03/14