www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.bugs - [Issue 10093] New: wrong unsigned arithmetic

reply d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093

           Summary: wrong unsigned arithmetic
           Product: D
           Version: D2
          Platform: All
        OS/Version: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: DMD
        AssignedTo: nobody puremagic.com
        ReportedBy: luka8088 owave.net


--- Comment #0 from luka8088 <luka8088 owave.net> 2013-05-16 06:29:40 PDT ---
The following code fails:

static assert(-("foo".length) < 0);

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093


Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
             Status|NEW                         |RESOLVED
                 CC|                            |schveiguy yahoo.com
         Resolution|                            |INVALID


--- Comment #1 from Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> 2013-05-16
06:37:28 PDT ---
This is expected, array length is an unsigned property.  unsigned math results
in unsigned result.

You are basically saying:

static assert(-3u < 0)

0 is promoted to unsigned, and 0xff_ff_ff_fd is compared to it.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093


9999 <sibaqexozequgaba tempomail.fr> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
                 CC|                            |sibaqexozequgaba tempomail.
                   |                            |fr


--- Comment #2 from 9999 <sibaqexozequgaba tempomail.fr> 2013-05-16 10:36:20
PDT ---
Should a negative unsigned number even compile?
As far as I know, Visual C++ issues a warning in that case.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #3 from Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> 2013-05-16
11:11:38 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #2)
 Should a negative unsigned number even compile?
Debatable, but since it compiles in C, and is frequently used (-1u is 0xffffffff), I think it will continue to compile.
 As far as I know, Visual C++ issues a warning in that case.
But still compiles, right? C is full of questionable, yet valid, behavior. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #4 from 9999 <sibaqexozequgaba tempomail.fr> 2013-05-16 11:25:00
PDT ---
Why would you ever do -1u?
We don't talk about implicitly converting -1 to unsigned, right? That's a
different case.

-- 
Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #5 from Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> 2013-05-16
11:44:46 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #4)
 Why would you ever do -1u?
Shortcut. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #6 from 9999 <sibaqexozequgaba tempomail.fr> 2013-05-16 11:58:25
PDT ---
 We don't talk about implicitly converting -1 to unsigned, right? That's a
different case.
^ Am I missing something? ^ We're not talking about: func: void SetText(char* text, uint len); call: SetText(text, -1); ^ here -1 is a special constant meaning e.g. calculate the len of a null terminated string. We're talking about: uint len = strlen(text); // ... Func(-len); // Why would you ever need this? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #7 from Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> 2013-05-16
12:44:36 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
 We're talking about:
 uint len = strlen(text);
 // ...
 Func(-len); // Why would you ever need this?
What about Func(1 - len) The compiler can't cover every case. If you want to propose something to make this illegal, go ahead, but I doubt you will get traction. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #8 from luka8088 <luka8088 owave.net> 2013-05-16 12:49:27 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #6)
 We don't talk about implicitly converting -1 to unsigned, right? That's a
different case.
^ Am I missing something? ^ We're not talking about: func: void SetText(char* text, uint len); call: SetText(text, -1); ^ here -1 is a special constant meaning e.g. calculate the len of a null terminated string. We're talking about: uint len = strlen(text); // ... Func(-len); // Why would you ever need this?
The original issue was: auto offset = text1.length - text2.length; func(offset); and offset turned out to be around 4294967291 I was thinking, setting a uint to a negative value is kind of an overflow, should it maybe be treated the same way like array bounds and be checked by druntime (with optional disabling in production release)? -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #9 from 9999 <sibaqexozequgaba tempomail.fr> 2013-05-16 12:57:40
PDT ---
(In reply to comment #8)
 The original issue was:
 
 auto offset = text1.length - text2.length;
 func(offset);
 
 and offset turned out to be around 4294967291
 
 I was thinking, setting a uint to a negative value is kind of an overflow,
 should it maybe be treated the same way like array bounds and be checked by
 druntime (with optional disabling in production release)?
Well, that's probably something the compiler can't warn about. Not statically, that's for sure. You can use a custom type which checks for bound overflows, and fallback to regular int for release builds. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #10 from luka8088 <luka8088 owave.net> 2013-05-16 13:07:39 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #9)
 (In reply to comment #8)
 The original issue was:
 
 auto offset = text1.length - text2.length;
 func(offset);
 
 and offset turned out to be around 4294967291
 
 I was thinking, setting a uint to a negative value is kind of an overflow,
 should it maybe be treated the same way like array bounds and be checked by
 druntime (with optional disabling in production release)?
Well, that's probably something the compiler can't warn about. Not statically, that's for sure. You can use a custom type which checks for bound overflows, and fallback to regular int for release builds.
Yeah, I could, but should that maybe be in druntime? Also... void main () { auto a = 5 - 10u; // 4294967291u auto b = 5u - 10; // 4294967291u } Why are they both unsigned? I will take this to the forum. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #11 from Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> 2013-05-16
13:43:31 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #8)
 The original issue was:
 
 auto offset = text1.length - text2.length;
 func(offset);
 
 and offset turned out to be around 4294967291
 
 I was thinking, setting a uint to a negative value is kind of an overflow,
 should it maybe be treated the same way like array bounds and be checked by
 druntime (with optional disabling in production release)?
No. Just change func's parameter to an int. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #12 from luka8088 <luka8088 owave.net> 2013-05-16 13:48:38 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #11)
 (In reply to comment #8)
 The original issue was:
 
 auto offset = text1.length - text2.length;
 func(offset);
 
 and offset turned out to be around 4294967291
 
 I was thinking, setting a uint to a negative value is kind of an overflow,
 should it maybe be treated the same way like array bounds and be checked by
 druntime (with optional disabling in production release)?
No. Just change func's parameter to an int.
http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/611c13d7 Yeah, it is easy to solve when you add a writeln and see that unsigned is causing the issue. =) Btw: http://forum.dlang.org/thread/kn3f9v$25pd$1 digitalmars.com -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 16 2013
prev sibling parent d-bugmail puremagic.com writes:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10093



--- Comment #13 from Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy yahoo.com> 2013-05-17
08:14:33 PDT ---
(In reply to comment #12)
 http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/611c13d7
http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/cf56935d -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
May 17 2013