OverflowContexts.jl

[BioTurboNick]

Thought I would formally link to my variant in this area, OverflowContexts.jl, in part to explore if they could/should be merged.

[kimikage]

When I made CheckedArithmeticCore(#6, #8), CheckedArithmetic.jl was the only package that "practically worked" with respect to overflow issue.

Aside from the fact that OverflowContexts.jl is superior in terms of functionality, I am interested in the package name.

#9 (comment)

As mentioned in https://discourse.julialang.org/t/rfc-what-should-the-arithmetic-within-the-fixedpointnumbers-be/46697, I would like to add the definitions of arithmetic operations such as saturating_add and wrapping_sub, currently defined in FixedPointNumbers#master, to the CheckedArithmeticCore.

They are "unchecked", so it is a self-contradiction that they join the CheckedArithmetic. 😅 However, I think it's reasonable to assume that they just provide the opt-out functionality.

In other words, if saturating arithmetic is to be supported, I think OverflowContexts (or its derivatives) is more appropriate, at least in terms of name.

This is partly my fault, but this package has not changed practically for a long time.
@timholy, what do you think about making OverflowContexts.jl the successor to this package?

[kimikage]

@BioTurboNick Is OverflowContexts.jl compatible with julia v1.0?
Since v1.0 is old, I don't see the need for the additional support, but if it actually works, supporting v1.0 might make the migration smoother.

[kimikage]

xref: https://discourse.julialang.org/t/revisiting-saturating-intrinsics/112917/

[BioTurboNick]

It seems OverflowContexts.jl is only partly compatible with 1.0, I'll take a closer look to see if it's easily addressable, see no reason not to try.

[BioTurboNick]

Good news, it appears to be compatible after all. Just forced me to confront some bugs and deal with a change in 1.11.

[kimikage]

I am not a member of JuliaMath, so I cannot transfer OverflowContexts.jl to the organization. (It is, of course, reasonable to maintain it as a personal repository.)
And @timholy is always busy.

[StefanKarpinski]

We can add you and let you keep maintaining it here. If you ping me on Monday I'll do it.

[kimikage]

@StefanKarpinski
Let me make sure there is no misunderstanding.
By "you" do you mean me (@kimikage)? Or you guys, i.e. @BioTurboNick too?
By “here” do you mean “JuliaMath”?

If a member of JuliaMath transfers the repository via the member, at least I don't have to join JuliaMath.

Also, this seems like something that should be reviewed by @timholy once.
As you know, he is the creator of CheckedArithmetic.jl and has given good thought to the overflow issue (cf. https://discourse.julialang.org/t/rfc-what-should-the-arithmetic-within-the-fixedpointnumbers-be/46697/6).
At least he will reply within 3 years, unlike me. 😄

[BioTurboNick]

This works for me, happy to contribute it to the org and also to keep maintaining it.

[StefanKarpinski]

Ok, who should I add to the JuliaMath org? @BioTurboNick and @kimikage? Or just @BioTurboNick?

[kimikage]

One "authorized" person should be enough for this matter (i.e., the repository transfer).
I'd be happy to have more contributors, though.

[StefanKarpinski]

I've invited you both to JuliaMath.

[timholy]

I don't have a deep attachment to this package. If OverflowContexts.jl is superior---and it looks to be---I'd strongly support having other packages migrate to using it.

One missing element might be https://github.com/JuliaMath/CheckedArithmetic.jl?tab=readme-ov-file#accumulatortype-and-acc. The basic idea is that in addition to detecting/handling overflow, packages should also be able to recommend ways to avoid it. Generic algorithms leverage that info.