[swift-evolution] [Review] SE-0104: Protocol-oriented integers

[James Campbell]

Big step forward, no longer have to do this :
https://gist.github.com/jcampbell05/f6b5611bd7f61840edb10500fa69fd09

*___________________________________*

*James⎥Head of Trolls*

*james at supmenow.com <james at supmenow.com>⎥supmenow.com <http://supmenow.com>*

*Sup*

*Runway East *

*10 Finsbury Square*

*London*

* EC2A 1AF *

On 23 June 2016 at 17:08, Remy Demarest via swift-evolution <
swift-evolution at swift.org> wrote:

> I would also like to know why bit shifting and bit-wise and, or and xor
> operations are limited to FixedWidthInteger. I would think that a
> variable-length integer would be able to handle these operations in a
> predictable way consistent with the protocol. Wouldn't it?
>
> > Le 22 juin 2016 à 23:23, Félix Cloutier via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> a écrit :
> >
> > Do we lose the ability to create a signed integer from an unsigned bit
> pattern?
> >
> > Is there a way to get an optional initializer that returns `nil` if the
> operand can't be represented?
> >
> > What is the cost of heterogeneous comparison?
> >
> > Félix
> >
> >> Le 22 juin 2016 à 22:42:00, David Waite via swift-evolution <
> swift-evolution at swift.org> a écrit :
> >>
> >> In addition to the technical review, I would like to point out that the
> definition of Arithmetic appears to be missing some underscores in
> add/adding/subtract/subtracting
> >>>
> >>>
> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/proposals/0104-improved-integers.md
> >>>
> >>>     * What is your evaluation of the proposal?
> >>
> >> I’m so glad this work is being done!
> >>
> >> For Integer, does the presence of signBit indicate an expectation that
> signed Integers will have a two's complement representation?
> >>
> >> For FixedWidthInteger#dividedWithOverflow/remainderWithOverflow, under
> what situations would you have an overflow? I could only come up with
> something like Int.min.dividedWithOverflow(-1).
> >>
> >>>     * Is the problem being addressed significant enough to warrant a
> change to Swift?
> >>
> >> Yes, oh yes.
> >>
> >>>     * Does this proposal fit well with the feel and direction of Swift?
> >>
> >> It looks like a significant improvement.
> >>
> >>>
> >>>     * How much effort did you put into your review? A glance, a quick
> reading, or an in-depth study?
> >>
> >> I combed the proposal for questions, although most were answered by the
> time I hit the end.
> >>
> >> -DW
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> swift-evolution mailing list
> >> swift-evolution at swift.org
> >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > swift-evolution mailing list
> > swift-evolution at swift.org
> > https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
> _______________________________________________
> swift-evolution mailing list
> swift-evolution at swift.org
> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/attachments/20160623/1cc64aa3/attachment.html>