WrappingAdd, WrappingSub, WrappingMul, WrappingDiv, etc
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Markdown
- Stars
- 6.6k
- Forks
- 1.7k
- Avg merge
- 16h 14m
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 1
Description
Currently we have i32::wrapping_add, i32::wrapping_sub, i32::wrapping_div etc bound to i32, that is, there is no trait for them. We also have Wrapping<T>, and an impl for each number type. (source)
I want this to be changed, so that we instead have WrappingAdd which defines wrapping_add(self, RHS) -> Self::Output, WrappingSub which defines wrapping_sub(self, RHS) -> Self::Output and so on, and Wrapping<T> which uses them. This would hopefully simplify the language, and it would also be possible to create Wrapping<T>-compatible types. (You can't impl stuff for Wrapping currently.)
They would probably be placed in std::num.
(Side note: If it goes into std::ops we could also have wrapping ops in the form of |+|, |-|, etc.)
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by reviewing the existing i32 wrapping methods and the std::num::Wrapping implementation referenced in the issue. Compare the proposed trait placement in std::num with the alternative std::ops design. Done means producing an agreed RFC-level design for the traits, their outputs, and Wrapping integration.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- rust
- Domain
- compilers
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 5/5
- Estimated time
- Over a week
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 25/100