Prothon vs. Python integers

[Mark Hahn]

"Paul Prescod" <paul at prescod.net> wrote

> I think that in this case, Python is demonstrably better than Prothon.
>
> C:\temp\prothon\Prothon>python
> ActivePython 2.3.2 Build 232 (ActiveState Corp.) based on
> Python 2.3.2 (#49, Nov 13 2003, 10:34:54) [MSC v.1200 32 bit (Intel)] on
> win32
> Type "help", "copyright", "credits" or "license" for more information.
>
>  >>> print 2**65
> 36893488147419103232
>
>  >>> print 2**65 == (2**65 + 1)
> False
>
>
> C:\temp\prothon\Prothon>prothon
>
> Prothon 0.1 Interactive Console, Build 532, May 21 2004 (Ctrl-D to exit)
>
>  >>> print 2** 65
> 3.68935e+19
>
>  >>> print 2**65 == (2**65 + 1)
> True
>
> If Prothon is a language designed for the next ten years then it should
> be tuned for correctness and ease of use, not for limitations of today's
> hardware.

I'm sure this isn't the only place Python is better.

Prothon has the long integer support in the parser if anyone wants to take
the trouble to put the long object code in. I did nothing to preclude it. I
just didn't see any need for it myself and didn't take the trouble to put it
in.

Longs seemed like a needless exotic kludge to me in the 64-bit world. Surely
once you get to 3.7e19 you are in floating point territory. I can't imagine
counting anything up to 10**19.