[llvm-dev] [RFC] Coding Standards: "prefer `int` for regular arithmetic, use `unsigned` only for bitmask and when you intend to rely on wrapping behavior."
Jake Ehrlich via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Jun 10 10:15:43 PDT 2019
I'm in the same situation James is in and thus have the same bias but I'll
+1 that comment nevertheless. I think I prefer using size_t or the uintX_t
types where applicable. Only when I need a signed value do I use one.
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 9:59 AM James Henderson via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> Maybe it's just because I work in code around the binary file formats
> almost exclusively, but unsigned (or more often uint64_t) is FAR more
> common than int everywhere I go. I don't have time right now to read up on
> the different links you provided, and I expect this is covered in them, but
> it also seems odd to me to use int in a loop when indexing in a container
> (something that can't always be avoided), given the types of size() etc.
> On Mon, 10 Jun 2019 at 17:26, Michael Kruse via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>> Am Sa., 8. Juni 2019 um 13:12 Uhr schrieb Tim Northover via llvm-dev
>> <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>:
>> > I'd prefer us to have something neater than static_cast<int> for the
>> > loop problem before we made that change. Perhaps add an ssize (or
>> > equivalent) method to all of our internal data structures? They're a
>> > lot more common than std::* containers.
>> Since C++20 is also introducing ssize  members, this makes a lot of
>> sense to me. Using it would help avoiding an unsigned comparison as in
>> if (IndexOfInterestingElement >= Container.size())
>> to sneak in from the start.
>>  http://wg21.link/p1227r1
>> LLVM Developers mailing list
>> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the llvm-dev