# \[ANN\] SaferIntegers for v0.7 with \`^\`
**URL:** https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-saferintegers-for-v0-7-with/11713
**Category:** Community
**Created:** [June 16, 2018, 5:49am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-saferintegers-for-v0-7-with/11713 "2018-06-16T05:49:39Z")
**Posts on this page:** 5
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@JeffreySarnoff](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/JeffreySarnoff)
#### Post date: [June 16, 2018, 5:49am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-saferintegers-for-v0-7-with/11713/1 "2018-06-16T05:49:39Z")
The latest release of [SaferIntegers](https://github.com/JeffreySarnoff/SaferIntegers.jl) supports v0.7- (use an earlier release with v0.6). This release introduces a safe `^` that is very fast for bases 2:64. More tests have been added.
SaferIntegers.jl exports `SafeInt64`, `SafeInt32`, `SafeUInt64` …, types that are as Int and UInt types except that arithmetic overflow throws an OverflowError. These types allow you to work with integers knowing there is no silent wrap-around or other mistake being used.
Please see the [README](https://github.com/JeffreySarnoff/SaferIntegers.jl/blob/master/README.md) for more information.
---
### Author:  [@Jean\_Michel](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Jean_Michel)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2019, 12:07am UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-saferintegers-for-v0-7-with/11713/2 "2019-02-04T00:07:38Z")
Hello, I like `SafeInts`. Recently I wanted to use them for `Rational`s, but there are some small problems:
```julia
julia> using SaferIntegers
julia> a=SafeInt(6)
6
julia> b=SafeInt(8)
8
julia> c=a//b
ERROR: checked_abs not defined for SafeInt64
Stacktrace:
[1] error(::String, ::String, ::Type) at ./error.jl:42
[2] no_op_err(::String, ::Type) at ./promotion.jl:388
[3] checked_abs(::SafeInt64) at ./checked.jl:30
[4] gcd(::SafeInt64, ::SafeInt64) at ./intfuncs.jl:25
[5] divgcd(::SafeInt64, ::SafeInt64) at ./rational.jl:25
[6] Rational{SafeInt64}(::SafeInt64, ::SafeInt64) at ./rational.jl:14
[7] Rational(::SafeInt64, ::SafeInt64) at ./rational.jl:20
[8] //(::SafeInt64, ::SafeInt64) at ./rational.jl:43
[9] top-level scope at none:0
```
you can get around this error by
```julia
julia> Base.checked_abs(a::SafeInt)=abs(a)
julia> c=a//b
3//4
```
but there are further problems
```julia
julia> c+c
ERROR: MethodError: no method matching mul_with_overflow(::SafeInt64, ::SafeInt64)
Stacktrace:
[1] checked_mul at ./checked.jl:287 [inlined]
[2] +(::Rational{SafeInt64}, ::Rational{SafeInt64}) at ./rational.jl:253
[3] top-level scope at none:0
```
could you have a look at it?
Thanks in advance…
---
### Author:  [@JeffreySarnoff](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/JeffreySarnoff)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2019, 2:57pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-saferintegers-for-v0-7-with/11713/3 "2019-02-04T14:57:04Z")
Thank you for the heads up. I had not been supporting Rationals. Looking into it.
---
### Author:  [@JeffreySarnoff](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/JeffreySarnoff)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2019, 8:36pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-saferintegers-for-v0-7-with/11713/4 "2019-02-04T20:36:11Z")
SaferIntegers v0.3.0 supports Rational{SI} where SI\<:SafeInteger.
---
### Author:  [@Jean\_Michel](https://discourse.julialang.org/u/Jean_Michel)
#### Post date: [February 4, 2019, 9:41pm UTC](https://discourse.julialang.org/t/ann-saferintegers-for-v0-7-with/11713/5 "2019-02-04T21:41:32Z")
Thanks a lot! I wanted to check the correctness of a computation using a big rational matrix. Using SafeInts
slows down the computation by 10%, compared to Ints, while using BigInts slows it by a factor of 27!