Version française
Home     About     Download     Resources     Contact us    

This site is updated infrequently. For up-to-date information, please visit the new OCaml website at

Browse thread
[Caml-list] Int overflow in literals
[ Home ] [ Index: by date | by threads ]
[ Search: ]

[ Message by date: previous | next ] [ Message in thread: previous | next ] [ Thread: previous | next ]
Date: -- (:)
From: Frederic van der Plancke <fvdp@d...>
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Int overflow in literals

Issac Trotts wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 30, 2003 at 02:53:32PM +0100, Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk wrote:
> > I understand that int overflow is not checked on arithmetic for
> > efficiency reasons, but IMHO it would be better if it was checked
> > at least in literals. When someone writes 10000000000, he certainly
> > does not mean -737418240.
> If you want to be sure that the number is correctly stored, you can use
> Int64:
>     Int64.of_string "10000000000"
> Issac

That was not my problem. My problem was to be able to read a list of integers from a file and be warned in case of overflow. And to be able to rely on int_of_string for that purpose. I got hit... of course now I know, but other innocent programmers may get hit in the future as well. (Not to speak of the not-so-innocent people who wrote this nice OCaml compiler ;-)


To unsubscribe, mail Archives:
Bug reports: FAQ:
Beginner's list: