On 22/06/14 05:09 PM, Rick Richardson wrote: > Apologies if this has been suggested, but would it be possible to have a > compiler switch that can add runtime checks and abort on > overflow/underflow/carry for debugging purposes, but the default > behavior is no check? IMO this would be the best of both worlds, > because I would assume that one would really only care about checked > math during testing and dev.
You would need to build an entirely separate set of standard libraries with checked overflow. Adding new dialects of the language via compiler switches is never the right answer. It seems that every time an issue like this comes up, people propose making a compiler switch as the option. If we had compiler switches for abort vs. unwinding, no tracing gc support vs. tracing gc support, no integer overflow checks vs. integer overflow checks and more, we would have a truly ridiculous number of language dialects. I think even 2 dialects is too much...
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Rust-dev mailing list Rust-dev@mozilla.org https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/rust-dev
