From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <k.sosnin@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtp60.i.mail.ru (smtp60.i.mail.ru [217.69.128.40])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C54F4429E1
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Thu, 11 Jun 2020 23:30:56 +0300 (MSK)
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.0 \(3608.60.0.2.5\))
From: Chris Sosnin <k.sosnin@tarantool.org>
In-Reply-To: <b9973a24-3cfe-6dfb-0373-dd34771c15c3@tarantool.org>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2020 23:30:55 +0300
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <5E6B336C-D827-4334-8633-D0FF654A029D@tarantool.org>
References: <cover.1591371404.git.k.sosnin@tarantool.org>
 <473ff051ab9075f28732c28396d4465460e4a130.1591371404.git.k.sosnin@tarantool.org>
 <b9973a24-3cfe-6dfb-0373-dd34771c15c3@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 2/2] Add IsWhole method for checking
 the fractional part of a number
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Vladislav Shpilevoy <v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org

Thank you for the review!

> On 11 Jun 2020, at 20:06, Vladislav Shpilevoy =
<v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org> wrote:
>=20
> I guess you rather need name IsInt. 'Whole' has a different
> meaning.

You can say =E2=80=9Cwhole number=E2=80=9D =E2=80=94 a number without =
decimal part.
But IsInt sounds better, I agree.

>=20
> Why do you need it, btw? Why decNumberToInt64() and =
decNumberToUInt64()
> are not enough? The only usecase for this new function I can
> imagine is an attempt to shrink a decimal value into a normal integer.
> Which are either int64_t or uint64_t.

In case of doubles sqlVdbeIntValue returns 0 if an argument has no =
decimal part (and doesn=E2=80=99t overflow) and not 0 otherwise, but it =
always modifies a pointer to an integer, because some functions may =
still use the result of conversion. So I tried to make the behavior the =
same.

decimal_to_* functions always trim the value and don=E2=80=99t perform =
the check cause of decimal_to_integer call, decNumber ones require =
context (these also don=E2=80=99t really check for zero-decimal part =E2=80=
=94 instead comparing exponent with 0, making 1.000 a bad argument), so =
we need new wrappers which will do almost the same thing but with an =
extra check.