<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=us-ascii"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">I agree, I think this would require all integer types to have mandatory init(_:IntMax), init(_:UIntMax), init(truncatingBitPattern:IntMax) and init(truncatingBitPattern:UIntMax) constructors? Would make working with arbitrary sized integers in a generic way a lot easier.</div><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On 28 Jan 2016, at 04:02, Patrick Pijnappel via swift-evolution <<a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="">It seems <font face="monospace, monospace" class="">IntegerArithmeticType</font> should have a conversion from <font face="monospace, monospace" class="">IntMax</font>, in analogy with <font face="monospace, monospace" class="">Signed/UnsignedIntegerType</font>. It already has <font face="monospace, monospace" class="">toIntMax()</font>, but not the reverse conversion. This is important to be able to write generic algorithms on <font face="monospace, monospace" class="">IntegerArithmeticType</font>. Are there any reasons it shouldn't?<br class=""></div></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">swift-evolution mailing list<br class=""><a href="mailto:swift-evolution@swift.org" class="">swift-evolution@swift.org</a><br class="">https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution<br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></body></html>