Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Tim Prince <tprince@computer.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t |
| Date | 2011-04-30 12:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9237qcFjlrU1@mid.individual.net> (permalink) |
| References | <ipgasf$1q5b$1@adenine.netfront.net> <922rjhFp47U1@mid.individual.net> <invariant-20110430192324@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> |
On 4/30/2011 10:24 AM, Stefan Ram wrote: > Tim Prince<tprince@computer.org> writes: >> How about defining a loop invariant for the loop test, with matching >> data type? >> int i, ilimit=ASIZE(a); >> for (i = 0; i< ilimit; i++) > > An invariant »ilimit« > > size_t ilimit = ASIZE(a); > > can be made more readable as > > size_t const ilimit = ASIZE(a); > > . > > const yes, size_t no, the point is to avoid any implied up-casting inside the loop. -- Tim Prince
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Steve Keller <keller@no.invalid> - 2011-04-30 08:40 +0200
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Tim Prince <tprince@computer.org> - 2011-04-30 09:27 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Tim Prince <tprince@computer.org> - 2011-04-30 12:55 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-01 10:34 +1200
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t pozz <pozzugno@gmail.com> - 2011-04-30 19:33 +0200
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-01 09:03 +1200
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Tim Prince <tprince@computer.org> - 2011-04-30 14:34 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-01 10:37 +1200
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Datesfat Chicks <datesfat.chicks@gmail.com> - 2011-04-30 19:41 -0400
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-04-30 17:46 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Datesfat Chicks <datesfat.chicks@gmail.com> - 2011-05-01 21:27 -0400
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-04-30 22:23 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Dr Nick <3-nospam@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2011-05-01 14:16 +0100
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2011-05-01 10:31 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-05-01 12:25 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-05-01 20:00 -0400
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2011-05-02 10:17 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Dr Nick <3-nospam@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2011-05-02 08:37 +0100
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2011-05-03 06:02 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Peter Nilsson <airia@acay.com.au> - 2011-05-03 15:55 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Luca Forlizzi <luca.forlizzi@gmail.com> - 2011-05-05 02:38 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t ImpalerCore <jadill33@gmail.com> - 2011-05-05 06:37 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2011-05-05 16:10 +0000
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-05-05 09:35 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-05-05 11:22 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Peter Nilsson <airia@acay.com.au> - 2011-05-05 16:06 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Michael Press <rubrum@pacbell.net> - 2011-05-06 02:32 -0700
Re: int vs. unsigned int vs. size_t Luca Forlizzi <luca.forlizzi@gmail.com> - 2011-05-07 02:42 -0700
csiph-web