zlacker

>>tromp+(OP)
Meaningless question. If you allow arbitrary number formats you can just define 1 to be an arbitrarily large number.

>>IshKeb+db6
This is pedantic. Even mathematicians - famous pedants - embrace the subjective concept of "non-trivial" answers.

>>happyt+Uc6
To be pedantic, calling it pedantic is pedantic.

If the number representation is encoded outside the 64 bits then you have removed the 64 bit restriction. Of course it is hard to calculate how many bits of information are required to define the type. But "uint64" is pretty small and just requires our current human context (quite a few more bits of information) to make sense!