Re: Int overflow. Reply to reply to replies.

At 16:13 -0500 97/10/28, Alastair Reid wrote: >Once again, I refer people to the documentation for the shared Hugs-GHC >libraries. > > ftp://haskell.org/pub/reid/libs971028/libs.html > >As well as all the usual mutable stuff, these libraries provide the following > types: > > Int8, Int16, Int32,

Re: Int overflow. Reply to reply to replies.

At 21:25 -0500 97/10/27, Paul Hudak wrote: >S.D.Mechveliani wrote: > >> I wonder, why Haskell does not check/report the overflow for Int? > >After thinking about this for awhile, I agree with Sergey that there >should be an Int datatype that truly implements partial functions, not >total functions

Re: Int overflow. Reply to reply to replies.

Hans Aberg wrote: > From a generalistic point of view (not necessarily in the context of > Haskell), I am inclined to believe that the Int type should be replaced by > a type named Binary(32) or something. This binary type should know how to > do +, -, signed/unsigned