One effect of having a division by limit in the algorithm is that (at least on the usual kind of platform) you'll get SIGFPE or the local analogue if you pass limit==0.
Without a division, your code will presumably fail to notice the invalid input. Reading it over, it looks to me as if really_divisionless(0) will return 0, which of course is an illegal return value, because it's not true that 0 ≤ return value < limit.
Of course, all return values are illegal in this situation, for the same reason. So I'd almost (but not quite) feel happier if the function had contrived to loop forever if limit==0, because then it wouldn't return something out of range! :-)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2022-04-21 10:24 (UTC)limitin the algorithm is that (at least on the usual kind of platform) you'll get SIGFPE or the local analogue if you passlimit==0.Without a division, your code will presumably fail to notice the invalid input. Reading it over, it looks to me as if
really_divisionless(0)will return 0, which of course is an illegal return value, because it's not true that 0 ≤ return value <limit.Of course, all return values are illegal in this situation, for the same reason. So I'd almost (but not quite) feel happier if the function had contrived to loop forever if
limit==0, because then it wouldn't return something out of range! :-)