unchecked

PowerShell seems to perform bounds-checking after arithmetic operations and conversions. For instance, the following operations fail: [byte]$a = 255 $a++ $a = [byte]256 Is there any way to enforce overflows or the typecast without resorting to a manual calculation via modulo or C# and Add-Type? The behavior you want in PowerShell is achievable, though, it's a bit of a hack; and maybe there's a better way. If you just want cryptographic functionality though, it's worth calling out, that there's a TON of that already built-in to the BCL, and it's fully accessible from PowerShell (MD5, SHA, RSA,

Is there a way to make this method properly generic and do away with the warnings? /** * <p>Sort a collection by a certain "value" in its entries. This value is retrieved using * the given <code>valueFunction</code> which takes an entry as argument and returns * its value.</p> * * <p>Example:</p> * <pre>// sort tiles by number *Collects.sortByValue(tileList, true, new Function<Integer,NormalTile>() { * public Integer call(NormalTile t) { * return t.getNumber(); * } *});</pre> * * @param list The collection. * @param ascending Whether to sort ascending (<code>true</code>) or descending (<code

here is part of tutorial in oracle page : Consider the following example: List l = new ArrayList<Number>(); List<String> ls = l; // unchecked warning l.add(0, new Integer(42)); // another unchecked warning String s = ls.get(0); // ClassCastException is thrown In detail, a heap pollution situation occurs when the List object l, whose static type is List<Number> , is assigned to another List object, ls, that has a different static type, List<String> // this is from oracle tutorial my question would be why is the static type List<Number> and not just List ?? later another question would be from

I have the following Scala code. import scala.actors.Actor object Alice extends Actor { this.start def act{ loop{ react { case "Hello" => sender ! "Hi" case i:Int => sender ! 0 } } } } object Test { def test = { (Alice !? (100, "Hello")) match { case i:Some[Int] => println ("Int received "+i) case s:Some[String] => println ("String received "+s) case _ => } (Alice !? (100, 1)) match { case i:Some[Int] => println ("Int received "+i) case s:Some[String] => println ("String received "+s) case _ => } } } After doing Test.test , I get the output: scala> Test.test Int received Some(Hi) Int received

The following snippet evaluates to zero: int result = unchecked((int)double.MaxValue); Whereas, if you do this: double x = double.MaxValue int result = (int)x; The result is (would you even guess this?) int.MinValue . That fact alone is weird enough[see below], but I was under the impression that unchecked was meant to force the compiler into emitting code that pretends not to know that a conversion will definitely fail and/or some overflow happens. In other words, it should give the same result as when the compiler has no knowledge of the values involved (assuming it is compiled with "Check