Le dimanche 20 septembre 2015 à 17:07 -0400, Jesse Johnson a écrit : > In a thread about printing UInt variables, Milan Bouchet-Valat said: > > The point is, in Julia using unsigned ints to store values that > > should > > always be positive is *not* recommended. > If that is true, then shouldn't the type be called Byte? It seems the > type has been misnamed if it was never intended to store unsigned > integers. > > Further, calling the type UInt is misleading to devs from C lang > family > who frequently depend on compile-time type checking (ex. int vs. > uint) > to help ensure no unexpected signs show up. I am not suggesting > type-checking is a perfect defense against sign errors, and thorough > runtime testing is definitely necessary. In my larger projects > combining > type checking and runtime tests is almost a practical necessity and > can > seriously cut down on time spent bug hunting sign errors. > > That said, I am guessing the suggested solution in Julia is to rely > solely on runtime sign checking? I can't see how I could make that > practical for my use cases, but it would be good to know if that is > what the Julia devs intend. I think so. One of the references I could find is this: https://groups.google.com/d/msg/julia-users/RX8sFQHvEV4/ttxfYufL7WUJ
Regards
