10 ms·

But did you verify it never overflows? I think it is much harder to get that right without language (or compiler) support. Keep it mind that overflow is as seve

• kazinator 7y ago
  Had integers wrapped in a class, yes. > that overflow is as severe as memory bug in C/C++ In practice, it isn't. In many traditional compilers it has predictable behavior (two's complement wrapping), if we're not talking about floating-point overflow. Some programs explicitly rely on it. Compiler support can be provided for those programs. It's simply not in the same category as memory corruption bugs. Of course, ISO C and C++ have just one category for undefined! However, note that "undefined behavior" is a formal term which extends over beneficial areas such as documented extensions and the use of third-party libraries and headers.
  • bsder 7y ago
    > Had integers wrapped in a class, yes. Okay, you were serious about safety. Congratulations, you are the first one I have ever come across. I have never seen anyone else wrap integers in a class in order to use them with stable semantics.
    • kazinator 7y ago
      That was practically a poster example to sell C++. Look, you can overload operators and get arrays with bounds checking, integers that trap overflows and so on. Twenty years ago, C++ was still hot and there was a lot of interest in all sorts of techniques. Books, seminars, papers, blogs, you name it. There is a way to use C++ template partial specialization to mimic the built-in conversion rules, like "int op long" promoting the left operan to "int". You can mirror the language in itself and bend the rules.