Re: [Axiom-developer] RE: algebra Makefiles withexplicit dependencies, bootstrap, fixed-points etc.

[Ralf Hemmecke]

Well, is this construction better?

n: Integer := someComputationWithResultBiggerThan_1E32;
for i in n..n+1 repeat ...

I am not saying that I would use it, but who knows what pops up in a 
computation?

Ralf



William Sit wrote:
> Let's not forget that 2^32 is over 4 billion.
>
> William
> --
>
> Ralf Hemmecke wrote:
>
> > This sounds like forbidding
> >
> > for i in 10^32 .. repeat ....
> >
> > or do I misunderstand something?
> >
> > Ralf
> >
> > root wrote:
> >
> > > Steve,
> > >
> > > I don't know if there is an actual statement to the effect that
> > > the upper bound on a loop would be a register-sized number (32
> > > or 64 bits) but at 6Mhz it seemed impossible that one could
> > > run a loop of any consequence for greater than 2^32 or 2^64
> > > iterations. If you wanted to do that you'd have to do the
> > > looping using some other construct. In general it is safe to
> > > assume that the upper bound of the register size cannot be
> > > exceeded. There is a practical performance difference to
> > > be gained by using (declare (fixnum  as the compiler can,
> > > in the best case, assign a register to the loop variable.