erlang
erlang: Add int/1 and uint/1 as built-in types
This PR adds convenience types for expressing integers of a certain width and signedness, letting us remove ad-hoc definitions in various places.
CT Test Results
5 files 252 suites 2h 6m 50s ⏱️ 4 114 tests 4 010 ✅ 103 💤 1 ❌ 5 251 runs 5 122 ✅ 128 💤 1 ❌
For more details on these failures, see this check.
Results for commit 8d3e421e.
:recycle: This comment has been updated with latest results.
To speed up review, make sure that you have read Contributing to Erlang/OTP and that all checks pass.
See the TESTING and DEVELOPMENT HowTo guides for details about how to run test locally.
Artifacts
// Erlang/OTP Github Action Bot
![github-actions[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/15368?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
I'm not sure those types are particularly useful by themselves. There's nothing that guarantees any operation on an int(32) type will be within bounds - e.g. adding two int(32) can easily over- or underflow and exceed the range. This means the types are effectively only useful for literals and can't be easily enforced.
If we really wanted this, I think it should be paired with some sort of int module that supports fixed-size integer operations.
Of course, this is just to standardize on a type instead of having lots of ad-hoc ones in socket, rand, etc.
This is just a much more convenient and readable way to write for example -16#7FFF_FFFF..16#7FFF_FFFE as int(32) instead. It will really improve readability for many socket options in socket, as well as in many other modules that deal with protocols and interfacing.
