[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: problem with string.format %d and very large integers
- From: Lorenzo Donati <lorenzodonatibz@...>
- Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 21:21:13 +0200
Sorry for quoting myself:
On 29/07/2011 21.01, Lorenzo Donati wrote:
I assume we can relay on that case, but is it feasible to put in the
manual a comprehensive list of where this "implicit 32 bit integer"
problem could bite us?
This seem a case where having some interpreter limits available at
runtime would be very useful to write more robust scripts.
I know that I asked for this long ago, and Luiz replied that it could
encourage complicated programming.
But still, here I feel we could benefit from definitions like these:
_NUMBER_TYPE = "double"
_IMPLICIT_INT_WIDTH = 32
I know they are ugly, but it's uglier to try to guess them when you run
a script with different interpreters (maybe one out of your control,
because embedded in another program of which you don't have the source).