
Aug. 29, 2006
8:10 p.m.
Hi Tim, On Sat, Aug 26, 2006 at 08:37:46PM -0400, Tim Peters wrote:
[Thomas Wouters]
Why not just "... && x == LONG_MIN"?
it's better (when possible) not to tie the code to that `x` was specifically declared as type "long" (e.g., just more stuff that will break if Python decides to make its short int of type PY_LONG_LONG instead).
The proposed "correct fix" breaks this goal too:
"if (y == -1 && x < 0 && (unsigned long)x == -(unsigned long)x)".
^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ A bientot, Armin