From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,fee8802cc3d8334d X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 10a146,fee8802cc3d8334d X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public From: D'Arcy Smith Subject: Re: Ada and Java. different behaviour. casting long to int problem. Date: 1999/06/15 Message-ID: <3766D1CC.D712895E@itools.symantec.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 490033139 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <7jt2c0$vrb@drn.newsguy.com> <7k57vb$1ipf@drn.newsguy.com> <3766650F.705125B7@pwfl.com> <7k64t7$igo$1@its.hooked.net> <7k689a$ci2@drn.newsguy.com> <3766C842.E1EAB60A@pwfl.com> To: diespammer@pwfl.com X-Accept-Language: en Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Complaints-To: news@itools.symantec.com X-Trace: it.visualcafe.com 929485114 13270 155.64.77.48 (15 Jun 1999 22:18:34 GMT) Organization: Internet Tools Division, Symantec Corp. Mime-Version: 1.0 NNTP-Posting-Date: 15 Jun 1999 22:18:34 GMT Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.java.programmer Date: 1999-06-15T22:18:34+00:00 List-Id: Marin David Condic wrote: > What the > programmer is *likely* to do is go with all of his years of grade school > arithmetic and casually believe that X := X + 1 will yield the expected > result. I'd disagree that wrapping around is not intuitive... it can be a PITA... but it is intuitive. Since the language defines the behavious the programer _HAS_ to work withing the constraints set out in the language spec. Now should the language be defined differently... mabey. If the programer doesn;t follow the langauge spec then the fault is 100% theirs. > Blaming the programmer doesn't make the bugs not happen. Its like having > loose carpeting on the stairs and when someone trips and breaks their > neck, we stand around saying "He should have looked where he was going." > The poor dumb bastard is dead, dead, dead, and a couple of carpet tacks > would have prevented it. If your sent into a room that is full of pins sticking up from the floow - and you are tole that it is full of pins - and you run into the room with your eyes closed then it is 100% your fault. Could the language be defined differently to point out overflow erorrs? Sure. Ignorance of the language spec is not an excuse. Ignoring the language spec is idiocy. All in all though I do agree that it would be nice to be able to catch overflow errors... and it would not be hard to extend the language to do so. ..darcy -- D'Arcy Smith Sr. Software Engineer Symantec, Internet Tools Division If you simply reply to this email it will get forwarded to /dev/null My Email address is darcy at itools dot symantec dot com