Re: bigint/bugnum library
- Posted by jaygade Jul 13, 2013
- 1697 views
The way 4.1 is right now, I would agree. If we allow atoms to be smaller than integers, then I believe that this would become a bigger incompatibility - and having both would certainly make things no easier for anyone.
I don't think that would be as big of an issue, really. Atoms can still be larger than integers, it's just that they won't be as accurate for pure integer values.
Even double atoms can still be +/- 1e37. That's WAY bigger than most machine integers. And long doubles are +/-1e307 I think? That is HUGE.
Actually, this was a major headache and the reason I never finished my 64bit port - all kinds of weird problems showed up when this assumption is broken.
Matt did it, but once he had the proof of concept he decided things would be easier as well for an atom to be able to hold all the integral values that the integer type can hold.
It's STILL a headache, actually. Or so I've found when trying to port to OS X. I'm STILL obsessed with getting it right. (At least I'm not getting any more segfaults).
