[GiNaC-list] Possible size issue in test in numeric.cpp

[Pierangelo Masarati]

Chris Dams writes: 

>> My guess is that the test is incorrect on those architectures, but I
>> admit I haven't investigated enough.
> 
> I'm not a CLN expert either, but to me it does not seem that the code is
> incorrect. On the AMD 64 platform it is apparently always okay to apply
> the constructor cl_I(int) no matter how large the integer argument is. If
> the compiler is smart enough, it will automatically do what your patch is
> doing (i.e., throw the if out of the code), so I fail to see benefits from
> your patch.

OK, my main concern was about removing a couple annoying warnings (BTW: 
congratulations: they were the only warnings in the whole package, which 
seems pretty unusual to me, and a good programming practice). 

However, as far as I understand, although the code being safe, a test and a 
cast will always occur even if it's never required.  It's not a big deal, I 
concur, but it looks like a misuse of the CLN definitions.  My 2c. 

Cheers, p. 

Dr. Pierangelo Masarati               | voice: +39 02 2399 8309
Dip. Ing. Aerospaziale                | fax:   +39 02 2399 8334
Politecnico di Milano                 | mailto:pierangelo.masarati at polimi.it
via La Masa 34, 20156 Milano, Italy   | http://www.aero.polimi.it/~masarati 

Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html