On Tuesday, 30 January 2018 at 14:08:41 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Tuesday, 30 January 2018 at 11:09:08 UTC, Michael wrote:
On Monday, 29 January 2018 at 10:06:41 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Monday, January 29, 2018 09:58:00 Dave Jones via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Given
uint i = 12345;
should
On Tuesday, 30 January 2018 at 11:09:08 UTC, Michael wrote:
On Monday, 29 January 2018 at 10:06:41 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Monday, January 29, 2018 09:58:00 Dave Jones via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Given
uint i = 12345;
should
writeln(-i)
be an error? or maybe i should be automatically
On Monday, 29 January 2018 at 10:06:41 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Monday, January 29, 2018 09:58:00 Dave Jones via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Given
uint i = 12345;
should
writeln(-i)
be an error? or maybe i should be automatically cast to a
larger signed type?
It arguably should be, but
On Monday, January 29, 2018 09:58:00 Dave Jones via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Given
>
> uint i = 12345;
>
> should
>
> writeln(-i)
>
> be an error? or maybe i should be automatically cast to a larger
> signed type?
It arguably should be, but it's pretty common in C/C++ to get uint.max with
-1, and I
Given
uint i = 12345;
should
writeln(-i)
be an error? or maybe i should be automatically cast to a larger
signed type?
