---
There was some talk of supporting arbitrarily large integers. This was
mostly an academic discussion, since the currently supported range
(64 bits) should cover all use cases.
On Wed, Dec 1, 2021 at 8:49 PM Paul Smith <psm...@gnu.org> wrote:
>
> allowing practicality to drive simplification in code turns software
> development from an abstract mathematical science into a practical
> engineering problem :).
In fact, returning an error on out-of-range numbers might uncover bugs
that would have otherwise gone unnoticed.
The documentation change below simply mentions the supported width for
completeness.
Regards,
- Jouke
doc/make.texi | 5 +++++
1 file changed, 5 insertions(+)
diff --git a/doc/make.texi b/doc/make.texi
index 3dea24f1..cb2842b5 100644
--- a/doc/make.texi
+++ b/doc/make.texi
@@ -13035,6 +13035,11 @@ This means you haven't provided the requisite number
of arguments for
this function. See the documentation of the function for a description
of its arguments. @xref{Functions, ,Functions for Transforming Text}.
+@item Numerical result out of range: `@var{xxx}'. Stop.
+This means you have provided a numerical argument outside the range of
+supported values. This is likely unintended, because integers in
+@code{make} have a width of at least @w{64 bits}.
+
@item missing target pattern. Stop.
@itemx multiple target patterns. Stop.
@itemx target pattern contains no `%'. Stop.
--
2.34.1
