[Issue 1977] Relax warnings (D1)/errors (D2) for implicit narrowing conversions caused by promotions
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1977 Iain Buclaw changed: What|Removed |Added Priority|P2 |P4 --
[Issue 1977] Relax warnings (D1)/errors (D2) for implicit narrowing conversions caused by promotions
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1977 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Version|unspecified |D2 --
[Issue 1977] Relax warnings (D1)/errors (D2) for implicit narrowing conversions caused by promotions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1977 --- Comment #26 from Ryuichi OHORI r.97...@gmail.com 2012-10-13 04:28:56 PDT --- Your example is perfectly valid. I don't see. In the example above( http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/8b9f5471 ), the value in y is 16777216, which is greater than ushort.max. It knows the value of both x and y, so it knows that x |= y; will work just fine, because all of the values will fit in the correct types. If the value in y was too large to fit in a ushort, _then_ it should give you an error, but since it fits in a ushort just fine (and is positive, so there's no issues with two's complement or whatnot), the compiler knows that it's fine and allows it without complaint. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1977] Relax warnings (D1)/errors (D2) for implicit narrowing conversions caused by promotions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1977 --- Comment #28 from Ryuichi OHORI r.97...@gmail.com 2012-10-13 09:23:44 PDT --- (In reply to comment #27) reassigned to x because the result is only 4, which fits in a ushort just fine. The result is 16777220 if both operands are int. I think this is an implicit narrowing conversion. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1977] Relax warnings (D1)/errors (D2) for implicit narrowing conversions caused by promotions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1977 --- Comment #29 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2012-10-13 12:35:13 PDT --- The result is 16777220 if both operands are int. I think this is an implicit narrowing conversion. Ah. Then yes, it sounds like it's doing the wrong thing. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1977] Relax warnings (D1)/errors (D2) for implicit narrowing conversions caused by promotions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1977 Ryuichi OHORI r.97...@gmail.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||r.97...@gmail.com --- Comment #24 from Ryuichi OHORI r.97...@gmail.com 2012-10-12 18:48:51 PDT --- I still has read not all of the this conversation, but I think my issue is related to this. trivially incorrect use of op assignment operator is allowed: ushort |= int http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/8b9f5471 -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1977] Relax warnings (D1)/errors (D2) for implicit narrowing conversions caused by promotions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1977 Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||jmdavisp...@gmx.com --- Comment #25 from Jonathan M Davis jmdavisp...@gmx.com 2012-10-12 19:42:37 PDT --- trivially incorrect use of op assignment operator is allowed: Your example is perfectly valid. D uses range value propagation: http://www.drdobbs.com/tools/value-range-propagation/229300211 It knows the value of both x and y, so it knows that x |= y; will work just fine, because all of the values will fit in the correct types. If the value in y was too large to fit in a ushort, _then_ it should give you an error, but since it fits in a ushort just fine (and is positive, so there's no issues with two's complement or whatnot), the compiler knows that it's fine and allows it without complaint. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1977] Relax warnings (D1)/errors (D2) for implicit narrowing conversions caused by promotions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1977 --- Comment #22 from Jason House jason.james.ho...@gmail.com 2009-08-08 09:17:31 PDT --- (In reply to comment #21) I'm only worrying about D2 where implicit narrowing conversions is part of the spec. ulong%1000 should implicitly allowed when assigning to an integer. Should it be a distinct bugzilla entry? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 1977] Relax warnings (D1)/errors (D2) for implicit narrowing conversions caused by promotions
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1977 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com changed: What|Removed |Added CC||and...@metalanguage.com --- Comment #23 from Andrei Alexandrescu and...@metalanguage.com 2009-08-08 09:39:54 PDT --- (In reply to comment #22) (In reply to comment #21) I'm only worrying about D2 where implicit narrowing conversions is part of the spec. ulong%1000 should implicitly allowed when assigning to an integer. Should it be a distinct bugzilla entry? Range value propagation, which was implemented recently, should take care of this. It's among the simplest examples that should work with range value propagation. The compiler must infer that a % 1000 has range -999 through 999 and therefore should allow it to fit in a short or int. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
