WrappingAdd, WrappingSub, WrappingMul, WrappingDiv, etc

[SoniEx2]

Currently we have i32::wrapping_add, i32::wrapping_sub, i32::wrapping_div etc bound to i32, that is, there is no trait for them. We also have Wrapping<T>, and an impl for each number type. (source)

I want this to be changed, so that we instead have WrappingAdd which defines wrapping_add(self, RHS) -> Self::Output, WrappingSub which defines wrapping_sub(self, RHS) -> Self::Output and so on, and Wrapping<T> which uses them. This would hopefully simplify the language, and it would also be possible to create Wrapping<T>-compatible types. (You can't impl stuff for Wrapping currently.)

They would probably be placed in std::num.

(Side note: If it goes into std::ops we could also have wrapping ops in the form of |+|, |-|, etc.)

[est31]

Can we leave the creep for operators within inferior languages like swift? With wrapping_add I have something I can search for in google etc, but |+| isn't compatible with how google built its index.

[SoniEx2]

Uh, yeah, sure. I don't mind using Wrapping<T>. Just wish it wasn't so hardcoded.

[bstrie]

@est31 , please don't refer to other languages as inherently inferior.

[est31]

I will only reply shortly (even if this seems like a lot of text, I could write more on it), because discussing this further will get us way off-topic: I just expressed what I feel. I don't know swift really so I don't know whether its inherently inferior or not. Yes, everything has its upsides and downsides, and probably you have far more knowledge about Rust and Swift and can make a far more nuanced comparison. But I consider a small set of operators a feature, not something that must be extended, and this particular aspect of swift not well-thought. Perhaps my view is clouded due to preference, but I doubt that language success or ease to write in depends on how many operators it contains.

Note that for my limited POV, Swift is inferior. For people who want to program IOS apps, Swift may be not inferior, but Rust may be. I do accept that not everybody shares the same opinion, feelings, or view on a topic, and I hope you do, too.

[briansmith]

@SoniEx2 You changed the title of this issue to mention specific traits, but actually the issue is more general, right? In particular, we should also do the same for rotate_left() and rotate_right(), right? Or, is there some reason that should be put in another issue?

[SoniEx2]

@briansmith That's what the "etc" part of the title is for. Everything in https://static.rust-lang.org/doc/master/std/num/struct.Wrapping.html that isn't a blanket implementation (i.e. everything that doesn't have where T: ...) should have a corresponding WrappingWhatever trait.