bug#32252: [PATCH] %o and %x now format signed numbers

[Helmut Eller <eller.helmut@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jul 26 2018, Paul Eggert wrote:

> Helmut Eller wrote:
>>> And prohibit %x on bignums? That would make little sense.
>> It would prohibit only negative bignums just like negative flonums are
>> forbidden.
>
> So under this proposal %x would generate ambiguous output once we add
> bignums? For example, on a 32-bit platform (format "%x" -1) would
> generate the same output as (format "%x" #x3fffffff), even though -1
> and #x3fffffff would be different integers? That doesn't sound like a
> good idea.

Indeed, had forgotten that case.

>>> Common Lisp and Scheme don't have any such prohibition; why should
>>> Emacs Lisp?
>>
>> Because Emacs Lisp was very successful without bignums.
>
> This appears to be more an argument against bignums than anything
> else. I've used Emacs Lisp without bignums for many years, and it's
> *always* been a hindrance. I would much rather have bignums, as they
> would make a lot of things simpler.

Well, it's an argument to promote the special role of fixnums.

Helmut