Re: [PATCH] Loop Overflow Bug Fix

["Soni L." <fakedme@...>]

On 2017-11-20 12:29 PM, Coda Highland wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 19, 2017 at 12:13 AM, KHMan <keinhong@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Keeping 2s complement arithmetic in looping and its flaw(s) isn't
> > perfect but it's a known quantity. Patching the looping code would make it
> > "2s complement but not quite 2s complement". Either way, I hope we can have
> > some updates to the section on numerical loops in the reference manual.
> It's NOT 2s complement, though. It's 2s complement if you're working
> with integer loops, but it's signed magnitude if you're working with
> floating point, and Lua doesn't tell you explicitly which you're
> working with unless you ask. So it's already "signed magnitude, except
> when it's 2s complement" and Paige's patch brings it just a little bit
> closer to "always signed magnitude".
>
> /s/ Adam

Hmm...

Why not just get rid of for loops?

for (iter(1, 10), function(i)
  --...
end)

instead of

for i=1,10 do
  --...
end

Huge improvement. Then anyone can redefine `for` and `iter` with things like

for = myfor
local for = myfor
iter = myiter
local iter = myiter

--
Disclaimer: these emails may be made public at any given time, with or without reason. If you don't agree with this, DO NOT REPLY.