uint16 overflow check

[bobzhang]

there are two things wrong:

• literal overflow check missed
• overflow behavior inconsistent between different backends, the native backend wrap to 0 seems to be reasonable

[peter-jerry-ye-code-review]

Test case attempts to create UInt16 with value that exceeds maximum possible value

Category
Correctness
Code Snippet
inspect!((65536 : UInt16), content="65536")
Recommendation
This test should remain commented out or be modified to test overflow behavior explicitly. If testing overflow handling is intended, it should be in a separate test case clearly marked as testing overflow behavior.
Reasoning
UInt16 can only hold values from 0 to 65535 (2^16 - 1). The value 65536 exceeds this range and would cause an overflow. The original code correctly had this commented out with an explanatory comment.

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 6396

Details

• 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
• No unchanged relevant lines lost coverage.
• Overall coverage remained the same at 93.238%

---

Totals
Change from base Build 6394:	0.0%
Covered Lines:	5860
Relevant Lines:	6285

---

💛 - Coveralls

[bobzhang]

changed to

  inspect!((65535 : UInt16) + 1, content="65536")

to test overflow behavior
compiler crashed

Error: Moonc.Basic_hash_string.Key_not_found("$@moonbitlang/core/builtin.Add::UInt16::op_add")

cc @Guest0x0

[Yu-zh]

changed to

  inspect!((65535 : UInt16) + 1, content="65536")

to test overflow behavior compiler crashed

Error: Moonc.Basic_hash_string.Key_not_found("$@moonbitlang/core/builtin.Add::UInt16::op_add")

cc @Guest0x0

Add "moonbitlang/core/uint16" to "test-import" will fix this problem. This problem only happens when you are developing core