On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 02:25:03PM +0000, Marcus Comstedt (ACROSS) (Hail Ilpalazzo!) @ Pike (-) developers forum wrote:
In short, adding a new pike type for "unsigned INT_TYPE" would create lots of work for rather small benefits.
you mean on the C level? since on the pike level that type already exists. anyways, that makes sense and is good enough for me.
If you have a use-case where you would benefit from unsigned INT_TYPEs, I can show you how to rewrite it to benefit from signed INT_TYPEs instead.
if i can rewrite it why can't i let pike do it for me?
just to keep it in line with: "All so that you morons can write crappy code and still have it running fast as a breeze.... "
how would you rewrite an array of ipaddresses for example?
something like this?
class IPAddressList { array(int(-2147483648..2147483648)) ipaddresslist = ({}); int `[](int index) { return ipaddresses[index]+2147483648; } }
greetings, martin.