[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[bugs #11197] Error in string->number

From: Kevin Ryde
Subject: [bugs #11197] Error in string->number
Date: Tue, 28 Dec 2004 18:47:58 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i586; en-US; rv:1.7.3) Gecko/20041007 Debian/1.7.3-5

This mail is an automated notification from the bugs tracker
 of the project: Guile.

[bugs #11197] Latest Modifications:

Changes by: 
                Kevin Ryde <address@hidden>
                Tue 12/28/04 at 23:26 (Antarctica/McMurdo)

            What     | Removed                   | Added
              Status | Open                      | Closed

[bugs #11197] Full Item Snapshot:

URL: <http://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?func=detailitem&item_id=11197>
Project: Guile
Submitted by: 0
On: Fri 12/03/04 at 08:10

Category:  None
Severity:  5 - Average
Item Group:  None
Resolution:  Fixed
Privacy:  Public
Assigned to:  None
Status:  Closed

Summary:  Error in string->number

Original Submission:  guile> (string->number "111111" 7)
guile> (string->number "111111" 8)
guile> (string->number "111111" 9)
<unnamed port>:4:1: In procedure bignum in expression (string->number "111111" 
<unnamed port>:4:1: Numerical overflow
ABORT: (numerical-overflow)
Type "(backtrace)" to get more information or "(debug)" to enter the debugger.
guile> (string->number "111111" 10)
guile> (string->number "111111" 11)

Follow-up Comments

Date: Wed 12/08/04 at 23:00         By: Kevin Ryde <kryde>
Fixed in the cvs, close this when 1.6.7 is released.

Date: Sat 12/04/04 at 22:02         By: Kevin Ryde <kryde>
In fact only bases 2, 10 and 16 look right.  Others have a bad bignum size 
calculation and overflow in various cases.

Only bases 2, 8, 10 and 16 are documented as supported, though others (below 
16) are not explicitly rejected.  Maybe that should change too.

For detailed info, follow this link:

  Message sent via/by Savannah

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]