• Tobias Pankrath (7/8) Dec 13 2019 void main()
• berni44 (8/12) Dec 13 2019 You need to tell, that this is an unsigned long literal, else the
• Tobias Pankrath (6/23) Dec 14 2019 As far as I understand the spec, the type is inferred from the
• berni44 (6/9) Dec 14 2019 You are right. The implementation does not do what the specs tell
• Tobias Pankrath (2/12) Dec 14 2019 Thank you!

Tobias Pankrath <tobias pankrath.net> writes:

void main()
{
     auto x = 9223372036854775808; // long.max + 1
}

 onlineapp.d(3): Error: signed integer overflow

According to spec x should be of type ulong and this should 
compile? It indeed compiles if I add the uL postfix.

Is this a bug or indented behaviour?

berni44 <dlang d-ecke.de> writes:

On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 07:09:30 UTC, Tobias Pankrath 
wrote:
 void main()
 {
     auto x = 9223372036854775808; // long.max + 1
 }

You need to tell, that this is an unsigned long literal, else the 
compiler treats it as an int:

void main()
{
     auto x = 9223372036854775808UL; // long.max + 1
}

Tobias Pankrath <tobias pankrath.net> writes:

On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 07:44:37 UTC, berni44 wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 07:09:30 UTC, Tobias Pankrath 
 wrote:
 void main()
 {
     auto x = 9223372036854775808; // long.max + 1
 }

 You need to tell, that this is an unsigned long literal, else 
 the compiler treats it as an int:

 void main()
 {
     auto x = 9223372036854775808UL; // long.max + 1
 }

As far as I understand the spec, the type is inferred from the 
value range:

 Literal Type
 Usual decimal notation
0 .. 2_147_483_647 int
 2_147_483_648 .. 9_223_372_036_854_775_807 long
 9_223_372_036_854_775_808 .. 18_446_744_073_709_551_615 ulong

See: https://dlang.org/spec/lex.html#integerliteral

What I am aiming at: Is the spec wrong or am I misunderstanding 
it and did this change recently?

berni44 <dlang d-ecke.de> writes:

On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 09:33:13 UTC, Tobias Pankrath 
wrote:
 See: https://dlang.org/spec/lex.html#integerliteral

 What I am aiming at: Is the spec wrong or am I misunderstanding 
 it and did this change recently?

You are right. The implementation does not do what the specs tell 
here.
I filed a bug report: 
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20449

Tobias Pankrath <tobias pankrath.net> writes:

On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 10:32:10 UTC, berni44 wrote:
 On Saturday, 14 December 2019 at 09:33:13 UTC, Tobias Pankrath 
 wrote:
 See: https://dlang.org/spec/lex.html#integerliteral

 What I am aiming at: Is the spec wrong or am I 
 misunderstanding it and did this change recently?

 You are right. The implementation does not do what the specs 
 tell here.
 I filed a bug report: 
 https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20449

Thank you!