Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #172435
| From | Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail |
| Date | 2023-08-17 10:44 +0300 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <874jky2jvm.fsf@fatphil.org> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <6fcfcd10-82e7-4ecb-8bec-e6292ff73322n@googlegroups.com> <c7bd3b8e-a9d1-4e38-a4ce-f7697bc2e777n@googlegroups.com> <ubhrot$37a4c$1@dont-email.me> <ubifj9$39v7p$1@dont-email.me> <ubij3o$3afvd$1@dont-email.me> |
David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> writes: > On 16/08/2023 14:31, Bart wrote: >> On 16/08/2023 07:53, David Brown wrote: >>> Just to be clear about this in case anyone wonders why you wrote >>> that - plain "char" can be signed or unsigned, depending on the >>> platform. Older platforms (including x86) tend to have plain char >>> as signed, while more modern ABIs are usually unsigned. >>> >>> It is, of course, a terrible idea to do any kind of arithmetic or >>> hold numbers in plain char - use them for 7-bit ASCII characters >>> only. For anything with numbers, use "signed char", "unsigned >>> char", or (better, IMHO) appropriate <stdint.h> types when you need >>> a small integer type. >> >> Unfortunately, in C, string literals have type char*, and char* >> strings are encountered everywhere, where they can store ASCII, >> extended ASCII of various kinds, or UTF8. >> >> But you frequently need to manipulate individual character codes. > > It's quite rare to have to manipulate characters individually, other > than perhaps comparing them to character constants. Certainly general > arithmetic is very rare on characters, with the exception of something > like UTF8 code point extraction. Do you have examples where people > might reasonably want to perform arithmetic on plain char, that you > think occur frequently? > > I think it is entirely appropriate to use "char" for characters (and > const char* for immutable strings). But I don't think it is > appropriate for any kind of arithmetic. How would you hash a string (for example for insertion in a hash table) without arithmetic? Phil -- We are no longer hunters and nomads. No longer awed and frightened, as we have gained some understanding of the world in which we live. As such, we can cast aside childish remnants from the dawn of our civilization. -- NotSanguine on SoylentNews, after Eugen Weber in /The Western Tradition/
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 06:50 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 06:59 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 07:03 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-08-15 07:44 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-15 08:01 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2023-08-15 09:48 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 08:53 +0200
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 00:02 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 13:05 +0200
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-16 22:40 +0100
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2023-08-16 20:12 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 13:31 +0100
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 15:31 +0200
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-16 14:05 +0000
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 16:20 +0200
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-16 14:43 +0000
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 19:16 +0200
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2023-08-16 17:50 +0000
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-17 16:05 +0200
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 07:35 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-16 19:21 +0200
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 10:30 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 10:33 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-16 22:01 +0100
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 14:09 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 14:29 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 14:14 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-17 00:52 +0100
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 17:07 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 12:52 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 13:13 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2023-08-16 21:52 +0100
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 18:25 +0100
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-17 16:15 +0200
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-08-17 10:44 +0300
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 08:17 +0000
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Spiros Bousbouras <spibou@gmail.com> - 2023-08-17 08:51 +0000
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Phil Carmody <pc+usenet@asdf.org> - 2023-08-17 15:11 +0300
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2023-08-17 21:20 +0200
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 13:26 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2023-08-16 21:51 +0100
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 15:35 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 08:14 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 08:34 -0700
Re: signed/unsigned - what will fail fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2023-08-16 08:48 -0700
csiph-web