Archives of the Caml mailing list > Message from Issac Trotts

Browse thread

[Caml-list] Int overflow in literals

Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
- Alex Baretta
  - Frederic van der Plancke
    - Oleg Trott
      - Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
- Issac Trotts
  - Oleg Trott
    - skaller
      - Brian Hurt
        
        Marcin 'Qrczak' Kowalczyk
        
        skaller
    - Kenneth Knowles
      - Jacques Garrigue
        
        Kenneth Knowles
  - Frederic van der Plancke
    - Issac Trotts
    - Oleg Trott
- Xavier Leroy

Date:	-- (:)
From:	Issac Trotts <ijtrotts@u...>
Subject:	Re: [Caml-list] Int overflow in literals

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

-- 

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners