Comment by umanwizard
6 hours ago
Signed overflow being UB (while unsigned is defined to wrap) is a quirk of C and C++ specifically, not some fundamental property of computing.
6 hours ago
Signed overflow being UB (while unsigned is defined to wrap) is a quirk of C and C++ specifically, not some fundamental property of computing.
Nim (the original one, not Nimony) compiles to C, so making basic types work differently from C would involve major performance costs.
Presumably unsigned want to return errors too?
Edit: I guess they could get rid of a few numbers... Anyhow it isn't a philosophy that is going to get me to consider nimony for anything.
> making basic types work differently from C would involve major performance costs.
Not if you compile with optimizations on. This C code:
Compiles to this x86-64 assembly (with clang -O2):
Which, for those who aren't familiar with x86 assembly, is just the normal instruction for adding two numbers with wrapping semantics.
Specifically, C comes form a world where allowing for machines that didn't use 2's compliment (or 8 bit bytes) was an active concern.
Interestingly, C23 and C++20 standardized 2's complement representation for signed integers but kept UB on signed overflow.