From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Helmut Eller Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#32252: [PATCH] %o and %x now format signed numbers Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 11:39:47 +0200 Message-ID: References: <7e8dd084-7ab9-c2ce-1d6c-e673fa998f11@cs.ucla.edu> <6f720005-b5e4-5d1c-b4e8-a8992c7635c4@cs.ucla.edu> <1c3c61c4-f93f-3bea-f6ed-b89e1cdea89b@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1532597893 23404 195.159.176.226 (26 Jul 2018 09:38:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 09:38:13 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 32252@debbugs.gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 26 11:38:09 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ficik-0005xh-Eh for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 11:38:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33439 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fickr-0002Ul-33 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:40:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35407) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fickf-0002Ug-Uk for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:40:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fickc-0006Vf-W2 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:40:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:53291) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fickc-0006VZ-R6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:40:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fickc-0005Pe-K3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:40:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Helmut Eller Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2018 09:40:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 32252 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 32252-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B32252.153259799620789 (code B ref 32252); Thu, 26 Jul 2018 09:40:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 32252) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Jul 2018 09:39:56 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58309 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fickW-0005PF-47 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:39:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wr1-f51.google.com ([209.85.221.51]:40823) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fickU-0005P0-Ca for 32252@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 05:39:54 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wr1-f51.google.com with SMTP id h15-v6so1026428wrs.7 for <32252@debbugs.gnu.org>; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 02:39:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references:user-agent:date :message-id:mime-version; bh=X/y+qvOg8QF1ZmfD784lL8qPzCVjANzoShgmWbaORYc=; b=l1z0tYpuYl0gl2DL46clr327nPsDd/4Rd/8sSIFF9um6ZEvXBPfiRW+nczPYuVW2zR 5fRMdFhhIEz754kQuyvShQbzaUjQIrJcRETztdTT20kOtnTIjqpZIp1ioc4q3KBYh1Yf TFI/4cFXx2bl3u3K6Ddf4QSvjq7oyr5OO5/PGr897JsZuHH5I4cp4G9fx52WAJdfb4EX 9vWYMJREjN1rBVbGlJqSrz6s404fC6RFCdtmGuCJxmzjZd4iOl1JBdYC057c3PNRlelp +aeTnmm/LOIY9FkOucefkax9/WmQMLShxneGcs0L2Kp8nR9S+5sUXRf4354TrLjaPpGe NN9w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:references :user-agent:date:message-id:mime-version; bh=X/y+qvOg8QF1ZmfD784lL8qPzCVjANzoShgmWbaORYc=; b=mTfmjZlt0ErbDvwnYV9cnCUh3D40SzloI2JPw/f3NSd7ZvtAypa2Mp0MhvnUEAq7Ke +x5QIw3bKPZ0TTS5kSpH1qbd22RysxLnlp2cdgG+EvIFVvbK1lS9BSJ2XOsqheqqJ8cn ZYms0jZQMomEpVnnUs6gyMvF5mKVsBdmvwrbz5n7MFqgGiR00NCMTtnczaTCl8Eayo4R odWoqXXCbI9DE/SE19yyw+qSedfgzCslhfxLmbYtazPY7mOPakL1djNMOjvxKIDTAxyV P2TCiy8UMFFmOcW3eFZSuQMcSXaGLONcwyEwtxFrU0vJGX5+BoSW3v929NER/6m3jJx1 371A== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlGBroWoTG6FUfi4EnAVaqIzRvPu32WnXmB+l+XaFag68TDbK77a 7rbljossfLKt+wnYWNi14ZtBfSqw X-Google-Smtp-Source: AAOMgpc+H9agU17ylrHI0vYAh47iHPYamxwTO3ccaD/TYWCWQRAyqknO80FVzepzrWhWGgtcUOexeA== X-Received: by 2002:a5d:61ca:: with SMTP id q10-v6mr972607wrv.33.1532597988388; Thu, 26 Jul 2018 02:39:48 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from caladan ([37.186.181.82]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id a2-v6sm891047wmb.6.2018.07.26.02.39.47 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Thu, 26 Jul 2018 02:39:47 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Paul Eggert's message of "Thu, 26 Jul 2018 02:15:52 -0700") X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:148958 Archived-At: 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