-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.1k
Fix for numeric underflow with BigDecimal in NumericRange. #7670
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
|
Fixes scala/bug#11152, alternative to #7516 that doesn't reintroduce old bugs |
|
Sounds like this is ready to merge? |
|
@adriaanm - I still need to fix the test to test something. |
|
Ping @Ichoran |
|
Oops. I'll get to it tonight or tomorrow. |
|
...or not. Definitely during the weekend; maybe Friday evening, but since I'm in California I don't expect there will be any practical difference. |
Doesn't address the difficult issue of what the "natural" behavior is for BigDecimal. Instead, it just takes the precision it's given and throws an exception if the step size cannot be represented without loss. Tests for appropriate behavior are included.
|
@adriaanm - All ready now, assuming the tests pass. (They pass locally.) |
Doesn't address the difficult issue of what the "natural" behavior is for
BigDecimal. Instead, it just takes the precision it's given and throws
an exception if the step size cannot be represented without loss.