Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch > #6631

Re: ffs16

Show all headers | View raw

MitchAlsup wrote:
> Unless a variable can meaningfully take on a negative
> value, you are almost always better off declaring it to
> be unsigned. In 20 years fo writing CPU simulators, I
> used signed values about 14 times other than as arguments
> to and results from predefined functions. Probably close
> to 1000:1 (maybe more).

Thank you Mitch!

I live on the same page as you, I hate the fact that C has a nice short 
word for signed integers and a much longer one for unsigned.

Even with the newer sized types, I still need to add an extra 'u' in 
front of the signed type name. :-(

Personally, I try to newer use signed ints unless it is really required.

As an example, an interface where all returns are positive, except for 
-1 for an error, would still be better implemented as unsigned, with all 
bits set as the error value.

Terje
-- 
- <Terje.Mathisen at tmsw.no>
"almost all programming can be viewed as an exercise in caching"

Back to comp.arch | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

ffs16 jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-04-22 21:36 +0000
  Re: ffs16 Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-04-22 15:23 -0700
  Re: ffs16 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-04-22 20:37 -0400
    Re: ffs16 Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2012-04-24 06:36 -0700
      Re: ffs16 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-04-24 20:32 -0400
        Re: ffs16 Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2012-04-25 00:30 -0700
  Re: ffs16 Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-23 16:22 +0200
    Re: ffs16 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-04-23 21:46 -0400
      Re: ffs16 Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-24 14:16 +0200
        Re: ffs16 Eric Sosman <esosman@ieee-dot-org.invalid> - 2012-04-24 20:40 -0400
    Re: ffs16 jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-04-24 19:06 +0000
      Re: ffs16 Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-25 00:38 +0200
        Re: ffs16 jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-04-25 20:08 +0000
          Re: ffs16 "James Van Buskirk" <not_valid@comcast.net> - 2012-04-25 15:06 -0600
            Re: ffs16 "James Van Buskirk" <not_valid@comcast.net> - 2012-04-25 16:30 -0600
        Re: ffs16 jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-04-25 21:25 +0000
          Re: ffs16 Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-26 01:38 +0200
            Re: ffs16 jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-04-26 19:34 +0000
            Re: ffs16 jgk@panix.com (Joe keane) - 2012-04-26 20:41 +0000
              Re: ffs16 Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-27 02:47 +0200
  Re: ffs16 MitchAlsup <MitchAlsup@aol.com> - 2012-04-23 13:01 -0700
    Re: ffs16 Terje Mathisen <"terje.mathisen at tmsw.no"> - 2012-04-24 03:28 +0200
      Re: ffs16 nmm1@cam.ac.uk - 2012-04-24 09:15 +0100
      Re: ffs16 Chris Gray <cg@GraySage.com> - 2012-04-24 13:37 -0600

csiph-web