SafeInt!T is an integer wrapper struct with an explicit NaN value build on top of core.checkedint.

Features:

* checks if assigned values can be actually stored
* for SafeInt!u(T) NaN is T.max
* for SafeInt!T NaN is T.min
* SafeInt!T.opBinary("+","-","%","*","/") return SafeInt!T
  if value can not be store by SafeInt!T returned value is SafeInt!T.nan
* should be pretty much a act as any (u)integer type

Additionally, the module contains safe ==,!=,<,<=,>,>= comparisons functions

assert(-1 == uint.max); // this is wrongfully true
assert(notEqual(-1, uint.max)); // this asserts correctly true

PR: https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/3389

On 2015-06-07 22:27, Robert burner Schadek wrote:
> SafeInt!T is an integer wrapper struct with an explicit NaN value build
> on top of core.checkedint.

A completely new module should go through the review queue [1] and no pull request should be created until it's passed the review.

[1] http://wiki.dlang.org/Review_Queue

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 6/7/2015 1:27 PM, Robert burner Schadek wrote:
> SafeInt!T is an integer wrapper struct with an explicit NaN value build on top
> of core.checkedint.

Bearophile ought to like this!

On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 06:43:59 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> A completely new module should go through the review queue [1] and no pull request should be created until it's passed the review.

The part about the PR would be a first and quiet useless.

On 08-Jun-2015 09:44, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2015-06-07 22:27, Robert burner Schadek wrote:
>> SafeInt!T is an integer wrapper struct with an explicit NaN value build
>> on top of core.checkedint.
>
> A completely new module should go through the review queue [1] and no
> pull request should be created until it's passed the review.
>
> [1] http://wiki.dlang.org/Review_Queue
>

Actually it became quite common to present it as a pull request along with documentation (where's DDoc, Robert?). It makes commenting on code a breeze. Plus re-use of auto-tester - author has more time to fix his stuff should something not work on some platform.

OT: I'm not quite sold on std.experimental as it 100% certain to be a breaking change once a module is promoted to std proper or phased out for that matter. And, of course, updating anything in std.experimental module is going to be a long tedious string of pull requests.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky

On 2015-06-08 12:33, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:

> Actually it became quite common to present it as a pull request along
> with documentation (where's DDoc, Robert?).

Yeah, I've noticed.

> It makes commenting on code
> a breeze. Plus re-use of auto-tester - author has more time to fix his
> stuff should something not work on some platform.

It's possible to comment on any commit on GitHub. You don't need a pull request for that.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 6/8/15 6:33 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:

> OT: I'm not quite sold on std.experimental as it 100% certain to be a
> breaking change once a module is promoted to std proper or phased out
> for that matter.

That's the point of it. "If you use this, your code may break."

> And, of course, updating anything in std.experimental
> module is going to be a long tedious string of pull requests.
>

How so?

-Steve

On Monday, 8 June 2015 at 10:33:12 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
> along with documentation (where's DDoc, Robert?).

http://burner.github.io/phobos/phobos-prerelease/std_experimental_safeint.html

On 08-Jun-2015 16:36, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On 6/8/15 6:33 AM, Dmitry Olshansky wrote:
>
>> OT: I'm not quite sold on std.experimental as it 100% certain to be a
>> breaking change once a module is promoted to std proper or phased out
>> for that matter.
>
> That's the point of it. "If you use this, your code may break."

Okay.

>> And, of course, updating anything in std.experimental
>> module is going to be a long tedious string of pull requests.
>>
>
> How so?

Compared to just featuring the code on dub repository:
a) Release cycle tied to dmd
b) All changes must be reviewed
c) Changes got to be small enough to not require long review

Thus overhauls of internals are not going to be easily deliverable,
nor bug-fixes can be got out of band with D distribution.

If anything I'd love to see more 3-rd party stuff that is easily installable.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky