Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: gcc failure (optimised/non-optimised) Date: Wed, 03 May 2017 12:54:39 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 39 Message-ID: References: <58fb2265.5246218@news.xs4all.nl> <959d5007-8ac8-42f9-a6d9-b5e23feda0de@googlegroups.com> <36d67442-8861-41b5-b5b3-f71681740e59@googlegroups.com> <935683a9-7c2e-4f71-adcc-998d8a7fe0b4@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="19a76335ac2142e153f4288dee9a58f7"; logging-data="5041"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+w+yLCntwKt85V57+bSI8q" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:540xc74pb9eddnNk7nBiKdV7h08= sha1:zM5Dbgz19ip8uWWNImFFDqW75o4= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:109135 David Kleinecke writes: [...] > I experiment with things outside the box. I generally rewrite > other people's source code in different styles and look at the > result. I decided that using Int for unsigned integers was not > a great idea - regardless of whether it was the way things "should" > have been done - for the reasons you adduce. I fear I did not make > that clear earlier. Glad to hear it! > The Unt idea, on the other hand, seem to be > acceptable. I see no reason for the extra letter in Uint. If I saw the word "Unt" in isolation, I would have no idea what it means. (My first thought was "Untermenschen".) Chopping off the first letter of "integer" to form an abbreviation is something I find strongly counterintuitive; it almost completely loses the mental association with the word "integer". Apparently your intuition differs from mine. On the other hand, there is ample precedent for using "uint" as an abbreviation for "unsigned int" or "unsigned integer". If you find "Unt" clear enough for your own purposes, that's fine. If your intent is to communicate with others, I suggest that "Unt" would be a barrier to that communication. (One minor data point: I've found myself typing "Uint" several times while writing this, and had to go back and delete the 'i'.) Personally I find little or no value in creating abbreviated names for existing types. If I want to refer to type unsigned int, I'll type either "unsigned int" or "unsigned". -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc. "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this." -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"