• bearophile (7/8) Jan 28 2014 https://gist.github.com/aseemk/8637896
• Asman01 (3/11) Feb 03 2014 Wouldn't be better if the current implementation just extends to
• bearophile (11/13) Feb 03 2014 The % operator present in D works with negative numbers in a

"bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

The latest changes in the CoffeScript language have added a 
built-in "%%" operator:

 Correct modulo operator %% (respects negatives)

https://gist.github.com/aseemk/8637896

(In Python the % operator works in this correct way.)

It's the same operator I suggested to add to D.

Bye,
bearophile

"Asman01" <jckj33 gmail.com> writes:

On Tuesday, 28 January 2014 at 10:55:08 UTC, bearophile wrote:
 The latest changes in the CoffeScript language have added a 
 built-in "%%" operator:

 Correct modulo operator %% (respects negatives)

 https://gist.github.com/aseemk/8637896

 (In Python the % operator works in this correct way.)

 It's the same operator I suggested to add to D.

 Bye,
 bearophile

Wouldn't be better if the current implementation just extends to 
work with negatives instead of create a new one?

"bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

Asman01:

 Wouldn't be better if the current implementation just extends 
 to work with negatives instead of create a new one?

The % operator present in D works with negative numbers in a 
definite way, as in C99. But it has a semantics that in most 
cases is not the most useful one.

You can't change the semantics of the % D operator because of 
code breakage and breakage of compatibility with C99. But %% is 
one of the few ways to offer a new semantics.

For unsigned values or signed values that D knows statically have 
a positive value %% gets replaced by %.

Bye,
bearophile