A RetroSearch Logo

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Search Query:

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2002-October/029322.html below:

[Python-Dev] Unclear on the way forward with unsigned integers

[Python-Dev] Unclear on the way forward with unsigned integers [Python-Dev] Unclear on the way forward with unsigned integersGuido van Rossum guido@python.org
Mon, 07 Oct 2002 16:32:42 -0400
> I've reread pep237 (is this the relevant one?) again.

Yes.

> Do I understand this correctly, that all the following expressions
> will be 'true' and will compile/execute without any warnings (on
> a 32bit box):
> 
> Python 2.2:
> 0x80000000 == -2147483648

Yes.

> Python 2.3:
> 0x80000000L == 2147483648

Also in 2.2.  Before that, 0x80000000L had the same value, but
2147483648 raised OverflowError.

> Python 2.x (Phase B1?):
> 0x80000000L == 2147483648
> 
> Python 2.y (Phase B2 and later):
> 0x80000000 == 2147483648

Yes.

--Guido van Rossum (home page: http://www.python.org/~guido/)



RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue

Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo

HTML: 3.2 | Encoding: UTF-8 | Version: 0.7.4