On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 5:58 AM, Mike Hinchey<hinche...@gmail.com> wrote: > The difference is MAX_VALUE is a primitive int, but 1 (any literal) is an > Integer. > > user> Integer/MAX_VALUE > 2147483647 > user> (inc 2147483647) > 2147483648 > > But, I agree there is inconsistency. They should all check, except for the > unchecked-* fns. > > user> (* Double/MAX_VALUE Double/MAX_VALUE) > Infinity > user> (* Integer/MAX_VALUE Integer/MAX_VALUE) > #<CompilerException java.lang.ArithmeticException: integer overflow > (NO_SOURCE_FILE:0)> > > Since multiple for long and int checks for overflow, shouldn't multiple for > double and float check for Infinity?
No. Infinity is a possible and detectable value of floats. Anyone using floats has to potentially deal with it. Integer wrap produces undetectably bad integers, thus the check. Rich --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
