On Sat, Dec 08, 2007 at 02:06:03PM -0500, Brian Hurt wrote:
> I have personally come to the opinion that the main use of having more
> than one type of integer is to allow the programmer to pick the wrong one.
Cute, but wrong. It's like saying - having more than one size of
screw/screwdriver/hammer/engine/boat is wrong.
> Using only a single word, or a partial-word, to represent an integer is an
> *optimization*, not a data type consideration. Having the programmer pick
> what word size to hold the integer in is a fraught with potiential bugs
> and portability problems as having the programmer pick what register to
> hold the integer in.
Sure. It's the same problem as building a car with a small engine.
It might be 'efficient', or 'inadequate', depending on a variety of
conditions.
> This isn't just about the Y2038 bug- although that's an example. It's
> about the whole C99 long long fiasco. It's about the 32-bit limit that
> Java's starting to hit hard- Java used int's to index arrays, so you can't
> have an array with more than 2^31 elements. Etc.
If you have an array with more than 2^31 elements, your Java program will
run like a snail - your design is most likely wrong, or you picked the
wrong language to solve your problem. Hrm... somebody once said that
the reason there are many of X is so you can pick th wrong one.
I wonder if it still applies 8^)
florin
--
Bruce Schneier expects the Spanish Inquisition.
http://geekz.co.uk/schneierfacts/fact/163
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://mailman.mn-linux.org/pipermail/tclug-list/attachments/20071208/bac00f71/attachment.pgp