[M3devel] operator overloading?

[Daniel Alejandro Benavides D.]

Hi all:
I think besides is a needed feature and is in the Green Book to have arithmetic overflow.
The longer I see this, I came to see that we would need to simulate each arithmetic overflow case to see whether is ALU or FPU model we have that. This requires simulation overhead in the compiler but I guess the option would be have this infrastructure for source language compliance, thus allowing not compliant hardware to solve this issues with something like this, see:
http://nvl.nist.gov/pub/nistpubs/jres/101/2/j2anut.pdf
In any case there might not be too much delay for architectures such as VLSI.
Thanks in advance

--- El jue, 20/1/11, Dragiša Durić <dragisha at m3w.org> escribió:

> De: Dragiša Durić <dragisha at m3w.org>
> Asunto: Re: [M3devel] operator overloading?
> Para: "Henning Thielemann" <schlepptop at henning-thielemann.de>
> CC: "m3devel" <m3devel at elegosoft.com>
> Fecha: jueves, 20 de enero, 2011 16:46
> openssl library implements arbitrary
> precision integers, and I am using it on Windows, Linux and
> OSX. My binding is not complete but is useful, and I can
> submit it to cm3 for use/extending/...
> 
> dd
> 
> On Jan 20, 2011, at 9:30 PM, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> 
> > Tony Hosking schrieb:
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On Nov 21, 2010, at 3:11 PM, Jay K wrote:
> >> 
> >>>> I'm now starting to wish that we had left
> LONGINT out,
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> Just now? :)
> >>> (This is another reason I'm somewhat open to
> tediously using
> >>> Target.Int in frontend,
> >>> in case we do lose LONGINT.)
> >> 
> >> What it really suggests is that we need a proper
> infinite precision
> >> integer library.  Do we have one somewhere
> already?
> > 
> > I have coded BigInteger in arithmetic package. It is
> not tuned in any
> > way (no Fourier transform and such tricks) and may
> contain bugs. You may
> > better call GNU multi precision library GMP.
> > 
> 
>