Re: [HACKERS] Re: your mail

Ah, here is an even clearer statement on unsigned.



> On Thu, 11 Feb 1999, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote:
> > > should use: signed or unsigned chars, anyone has an idea?
> > 
> > In all my own code, I always set the compiler option to make char an
> > unsigned type.  For portability I like to know that the behaviour
> > won't change as long as I carry over my compiler options.  I like
> > that way better than casting since I don't get conflict warnings
> > for sending unsigned (or signed) char to library functions.  Remember,
> > char, signed char and unsigned char are 3 distinct types even though
> > char has to behave exactly like one of the other two.  Setting it up on
> > the compiler command line gets around that.
> > 
> > As for signed vs. unsigned, I don't think it matters that much.  I chose
> > unsigned since I never do signed arithmetic on char and if I ever did I
> > would like to have the extra keywork to draw attention to it.
> 
>    That is what I think of, and what I usually use - tweak compiler options
> to unsigned char.
>    So, my conclusion - reject the patch and teach people to change compiler
> options.
> 
> Oleg.
> ---- 
>     Oleg Broytmann     http://members.xoom.com/phd2/     phd2@earthling.net
>            Programmers don't die, they just GOSUB without RETURN.
> 
> 
> 
> 


-- 
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://www.op.net/~candle
  maillist@candle.pha.pa.us            |  (610) 853-3000
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026