Yes, I think we want Integer to be the type that is used unless you ask for something else. It adheres to the principle of getting it right before optimizing.
On 7/11/07, Andrew Coppin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Stefan O'Rear wrote: > On Wed, Jul 11, 2007 at 08:16:50PM +0100, Andrew Coppin wrote: > >> Of course, sometimes you purposely write code which you know is going to >> overflow and wrap round in a specific way. But frequently you *don't* want >> this behaviour - and I wish there were some pragma or something to make >> this be checked. AFAIK, most CPU types give you an efficient way to testing >> for such conditions... >> > > Indeed. I beleive that Int should be removed from the Prelude. People > who need the algebraic properties of rings modulo 2^(2^n) can use the > sized integral types from Data.Int and Data.Word; people who want speed > and can satisfy the proof obligations can use Int and Word from the same > modules. Everyone else can use Integer, which should be made shorter than > Int for obvious psychological reasons. > Do we really want to do that? I mean, make Haskell in general 2 orders of magnitude slower (and heaven knows how many orders of magnitude more RAM hungry) for any program using more than a handful of integers? Personally, I'd prefer a way to just throw an exception when a numeric overflow happens. (Probably only for test purposes - so maybe a compiler flag?) How about the floating-point types? What do they currently do? _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
