[Octave-bug-tracker] [bug #54405] octave_idx_type index integer overflow math check doesn't work correctly

[John W. Eaton]

Follow-up Comment #32, bug #54405 (project octave):

I agree with Rik's comment #22.  This bug report has gone off the rails.

Please isolate the individual issues, open separate reports about them, close
this one, and try to keep some focus.

We already know that numbers like 


[9223372036854775807, 9223372036854775807]


in Octave and Matlab will lose precision because they are doubles.  If you
want them to be correct int64, then you can write


[int64(9223372036854775807), int64(9223372036854775807)]


in Matlab, but in Octave, this is bug #45945.  Unless the behavior of Matlab
has changed recently, these numbers can not be automatically recognized as
int64 without breaking compatibility.

That I/O and other functions may not handle int64 values as files sizes or
dimensions is another issue that could have a separate report if one is not
already open.

Properly catching dimension overflow in array constructors is another issue. 
If we don't have a bug report for that, then open a separate one.

Whatever the "try-catch double error problem" is, open a separate bug report
for just that issue if we don't already have one.

Whether Octave should use an unsigned type for array dimensions is another
issue that could have a separate bug report if we do not already have one.

    _______________________________________________________

Reply to this item at:

  <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?54405>

_______________________________________________
  Message sent via Savannah
  https://savannah.gnu.org/