Add support for native-sized integers #1060
Draft
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
IMPORTANT: There are two related MS proposals for native integer support: V9’s Native-sized integers and V11’s Numeric IntPtr.
V9 introduces
nintandnunintas two new types, which while required to map directly toSystem.IntPtrandSystem.UIntPtr, respectively, these new types are not synonyms for those underlying types. (They are, however, made synonyms in V11.)In V9 there are no predefined operators taking native integer types, and that instead implicit conversions are done to match the existing predefined operators. And that the predefined operators are added in V11.
Open Issue: It is likely that 12.6.4.7, "Better conversion target" is impacted by this feature addition; however, I was not able to determine how
nintandnuintfit in there.Open Issue: While researching this, I noticed that 12.4.7, “Numeric promotions” and its subsections are all marked as being informative. If so, where is this stuff stated/implied normatively? This would be OK if that content were stated (or implied) in some other, normative, place, but where is that? In any event, the supposedly informative text, “Binary numeric promotion consists of applying the following rules, in the order they appear here:” sure sounds normative to me!