-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 129
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Feature Request] Add u256 support #80
Labels
enhancement
New feature or request
Comments
The starcoin-framework implements U256 in Move by the native method. But we still expect the primitive u256. |
sahithiacn
pushed a commit
to sahithiacn/move
that referenced
this issue
Jan 2, 2023
Previous versions of commands listed in tutorial threw errors Signed-off-by: sahithiacn <sahithi.kalakonda@accenture.com>
bors-diem
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 3, 2023
Previous versions of commands listed in tutorial threw errors Signed-off-by: sahithiacn <sahithi.kalakonda@accenture.com> Closes: #317
bors-diem
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 3, 2023
Previous versions of commands listed in tutorial threw errors Signed-off-by: sahithiacn <sahithi.kalakonda@accenture.com>
bors-diem
pushed a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jan 6, 2023
Previous versions of commands listed in tutorial threw errors Signed-off-by: sahithiacn <sahithi.kalakonda@accenture.com> Closes: #317
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
🚀 Feature Request
Support u256 primitive type.
May also consider u16, u32, and signed integer type like i8, i16, i32 , i64, i128, i256.
A similar discussion exists in diem repo diem/diem#8504
Motivation
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
u256 are common used in solidity. Lack of u256 cause many problems when bridging asset or protocol into Move contracts.
And since Move doesn't float types, we need a large integer type to simulate float calculation for u128.
Pitch
A builtin support for u256 is what I'm expecting for.
alternative is using native structs, but it's tedious.
Additional context
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: