[12:38:17] 2375 [17:29:52] Any reason why Z31396 and Z31397 ought to behave differently with the renders? [17:30:26] Also ideally it should prevent me from saving something invalid like this [17:59:26] 2823 [18:00:21] Hi. I don't know if I'm in the right group. [18:03:08] I was trying to go to English Wikipedia group. [18:04:07] heh, no, not the right group [18:04:24] Can you redirect me? [18:07:30] The display functions are written to display valid objects. How they behave with invalid objects will depend. Integers are positive by default, as it happens, and a non-negative Integer is displayed as an absolute value without considering its sign, so any Integer with an invalid Sign will be displayed as if it were explicitly positive, I imagine. (re @Feeglgeef: Any [18:07:30] reason why Z [18:07:30] 31396 and Z31397 ought to behave differently with the renders?) [18:08:57] I don't know if there is one, to be fair (re @tolgaozses: Can you show me the way?) [18:23:49] The best I can offer is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:IRC. Good luck! (re @tolgaozses: Can you show me the way?) [18:24:08] Thanks [18:29:34] Right, but I would expect both to fail, integers should not be positive by default. Here an error is better than an inaccuracy. (re @Al: The display functions are written to display valid objects. How they behave with invalid objects will depend. Integers are posit...) [18:33:39] I’m inclined to agree. It’s a fairly simple change to the converters and the display function, I think. Validating against persisting invalid objects would require a Phabricator ticket. (re @Feeglgeef: Right, but I would expect both to fail, integers should not be positive by default. Here an error is better than an inaccuracy.)