math.big addition yields incorrect results

[squidink7]

Describe the bug

When trying to do basic arithmetic using big integers, it often returns results with the signs inverted or numbers being added when they should have been subtracted

Reproduction Steps

import math.big
x := big.integer_from_int(-1)
x + big.integer_from_int(200)

output is -199

Expected Behavior

the above code to return 199

Current Behavior

it returns -199

Possible Solution

No response

Additional Information/Context

No response

V version

0.4.7 be1bb60.9a0f4d8

Environment details (OS name and version, etc.)

V full version: V 0.4.7 be1bb60.9a0f4d8
OS: linux, "Arch Linux"
Processor: 12 cpus, 64bit, little endian, AMD Ryzen 5 7640U w/ Radeon 760M Graphics

getwd: /home/sirsegv
vexe: /home/sirsegv/.v/v
vexe mtime: 2024-09-19 13:10:00

vroot: OK, value: /home/sirsegv/.v
VMODULES: OK, value: /home/sirsegv/.vmodules
VTMP: OK, value: /tmp/v_1000

Git version: git version 2.46.1
Git vroot status: weekly.2024.07-1143-g9a0f4d84 (34 commit(s) behind V master)
.git/config present: true

CC version: cc (GCC) 14.2.1 20240910
thirdparty/tcc status: thirdparty-linux-amd64 0134e9b9

Note

You can use the 👍 reaction to increase the issue's priority for developers.

Please note that only the 👍 reaction to the issue itself counts as a vote.
Other reactions and those to comments will not be taken into account.

[spytheman]

Other weird results, that are probably due to the same bug:

import math.big

one := big.integer_from_int(1)
n_one := big.integer_from_int(-1)
x := big.integer_from_int(-1)
y := big.integer_from_int(200)
dump(x)
dump(y)
eprintln("-".repeat(30))
dump(x + y)
eprintln("-".repeat(30))
dump(x + one)
dump(one + x)
eprintln("-".repeat(30))
dump(y + one)
dump(one + y)
eprintln("-".repeat(30))
dump(x + n_one)
dump(n_one + x)
eprintln("-".repeat(30))
dump(y + n_one)
dump(n_one + y)
eprintln("-".repeat(30))
dump(x + y + one)
dump(x + one + y)
dump(one + y + x)
dump(one + x + y)
dump(y + one + x)
dump(y + x + one)
eprintln("-".repeat(30))
dump(x + y + n_one)
dump(x + n_one + y)
dump(n_one + y + x)
dump(n_one + x + y)
dump(y + n_one + x)
dump(y + x + n_one)

producing:

[ii.v:7] x: -1
[ii.v:8] y: 200
------------------------------
[ii.v:10] x + y: -199
------------------------------
[ii.v:12] x + one: 0
[ii.v:13] one + x: 0
------------------------------
[ii.v:15] y + one: 201
[ii.v:16] one + y: 201
------------------------------
[ii.v:18] x + n_one: -2
[ii.v:19] n_one + x: -2
------------------------------
[ii.v:21] y + n_one: 199
[ii.v:22] n_one + y: -199
------------------------------
[ii.v:24] x + y + one: -198
[ii.v:25] x + one + y: 200
[ii.v:26] one + y + x: 200
[ii.v:27] one + x + y: 200
[ii.v:28] y + one + x: 200
[ii.v:29] y + x + one: 200
------------------------------
[ii.v:31] x + y + n_one: -200
[ii.v:32] x + n_one + y: -198
[ii.v:33] n_one + y + x: -200
[ii.v:34] n_one + x + y: -198
[ii.v:35] y + n_one + x: 198
[ii.v:36] y + x + n_one: 198

[spytheman]

At first glance, perhaps the sign of the result, is determined by just looking at the sign of the receiver 🤔 .