Newsgroup: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Array Size
From: Juha Nieminen <nospam@...>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 07:30:47 +0000 (UTC)
Scott Lurndal <scott@...> wrote:
> And I disagree with the 'avoid unsigned types'. Use the type that's
> appropriate for the problem. The vast majority of types I use in
> my current projects are unsigned (uint32_t, uint64_t).
That principle has bitten me more than once.
For example in the past I adhered strictly to the convention of
"if negative values make no sense for an integral type, use an unsigned
type instead." Thus, for example, I used unsigned types to denote the
dimensions of an image or the screen.
And then I found myself writing things like this:
double destX = x + screenWidth / 2;
and wondering why it's not working properly.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@... ---
Subject: Re: Array Size
From: Juha Nieminen <nospam@...>
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2013 07:30:47 +0000 (UTC)
Scott Lurndal <scott@...> wrote:
> And I disagree with the 'avoid unsigned types'. Use the type that's
> appropriate for the problem. The vast majority of types I use in
> my current projects are unsigned (uint32_t, uint64_t).
That principle has bitten me more than once.
For example in the past I adhered strictly to the convention of
"if negative values make no sense for an integral type, use an unsigned
type instead." Thus, for example, I used unsigned types to denote the
dimensions of an image or the screen.
And then I found myself writing things like this:
double destX = x + screenWidth / 2;
and wondering why it's not working properly.
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@... ---
via Usenet Forums - Usenet Search,Free Usenet - comp.lang.c++ http://www.pocketbinaries.com/usenet-forums/showthread.php?26289-Array-Size&goto=newpost
View all the progranning help forums at:
http://www.pocketbinaries.com/usenet-forums/forumdisplay.php?128-Coding-forums
No comments:
Post a Comment