Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char) to (char) dangerous?

From	BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char) to (char) dangerous?
Date	2011-11-16 12:03 -0700
Organization	albasani.net
Message-ID	<ja11e9$de$1@news.albasani.net> (permalink)
References	<j9ugaj$q30$4@speranza.aioe.org> <b72e77c0-58f0-411a-b0eb-688ed3f51125@h5g2000yqk.googlegroups.com> <94c15554-8b3f-425b-9bea-822d9af8ad67@cu3g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On 11/16/2011 9:14 AM, nroberts wrote:
> On Nov 16, 1:36 am, Malcolm McLean<malcolm.mcle...@btinternet.com>
> wrote:
>> On Nov 15, 9:59 pm, tim<nos...@nospam.com>  wrote:>  thanks in advance for your help, tim
>>
>> In narrow technical sense, it's almost never dangerous. chars can have
>> trap representations whilst unsigned chars can't, but it's most
>> unlikely your code will ever need to run on such a machine.
>>
>> However casting unsigned char to char, though not the other way round,
>> usually means that someone doesn't know what they are doing. char
>> should be used for characters, i.e human-readable text unsigned char
>> for bytes, usually arbitrary bits, occasionally for small integers.
> Not since the 70's...maybe earlier.  The character sets on today's
> systems extend the full length of the 8 bit, unsigned character if not
> further.

tradition dictates use of "char *", but UTF-8 doesn't work so well with 
plain char, so casts both ways are often needed when working with UTF-8...

IMO, UTF-8 is still generally preferable to UTF-16 as:
the vast majority of text is smaller or the same size with UTF-8 (the 
main cases it is on-average bigger is with lots of CJK characters);
the raw performance difference usually does not matter (raw strings can 
be normalized, and compared as bytes, and cases where more complex logic 
is needed, UTF-16 will not save much performance-wise);
...

accessing UTF-8 strings by character index can also be handled (by 
faking it some).

>> If
>> you need a tiny signed integer, use signed char.
> Not unless you've got a really good reason.  It doesn't buy you
> anything.

I disagree...

often, saving memory is a good idea, as even with multiple GB of RAM, 
one can still end up using up most of it, and saving memory if one has a 
lot of data of a given type may often make sense.

using signed char arrays rather than int or similar, if the data will 
fit in a signed char, is often a good idea.
very often, people make use of more elaborate strategies (bit packing or 
mathematical transformations, or sometimes traditional data-compression 
strategies) to allow encoding data in less bits as well.

a lot depends on the type of app though...

for an app which never uses more than maybe a few MB of RAM, yes, saving 
a few bytes may not matter so much...

or such...

Thread

when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? tim <nospam@nospam.com> - 2011-11-15 19:59 +0000
  Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-15 20:51 +0000
    Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? tim <nospam@nospam.com> - 2011-11-16 16:55 +0000
      Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-16 17:54 +0000
        Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 11:27 -0800
          Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-16 19:49 +0000
            Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 11:52 -0800
              Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2011-11-16 20:06 +0000
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 14:55 -0800
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 04:42 -0800
              Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-16 15:15 -0500
          Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-16 15:24 -0500
            Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dĳk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 12:41 -0800
              Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-11-16 16:02 -0500
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dĳk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 13:23 -0800
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 15:32 -0800
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dĳk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 17:02 -0800
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-11-16 21:38 -0500
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 19:22 -0800
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dĳk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 23:08 -0800
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 23:46 -0800
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dĳk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-17 09:15 -0800
                Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-25 04:54 -0800
          Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2011-11-16 21:44 +0100
      Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2011-11-16 13:17 -0500
  Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-16 00:58 -0800
  Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2011-11-16 01:36 -0800
    Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Markus Wichmann <nullplan@gmx.net> - 2011-11-16 13:28 +0100
    Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? nroberts <roberts.noah@gmail.com> - 2011-11-16 08:14 -0800
      Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? BGB <cr88192@hotmail.com> - 2011-11-16 12:03 -0700
  Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? blp@cs.stanford.edu (Ben Pfaff) - 2011-11-16 08:58 -0800
    Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2011-11-16 19:04 +0100
      Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Ben Pfaff <blp@cs.stanford.edu> - 2011-11-16 10:05 -0800
      Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-16 11:19 -0800
        Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2011-11-16 20:58 +0100
          Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-11-18 15:37 +0200
            Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2011-11-18 19:41 +0100
              Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Vincenzo Mercuri <vincenzo.mercuri@yahoo.it> - 2011-11-18 19:43 +0100
  Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Lauri Alanko <la@iki.fi> - 2011-11-17 19:09 +0000
    Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Harald van Dĳk <truedfx@gmail.com> - 2011-11-17 11:44 -0800
    Re: when is typecasting (unsigned char*) to (char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-11-17 13:16 -0800
  Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-01-22 02:22 -0500
    Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Harald van Dijk <haraldvdijk@gmail.com> - 2012-01-22 12:14 -0800
    Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-23 00:37 -0800
      Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Jens Gustedt <jens.gustedt@loria.fr> - 2012-01-24 15:10 +0100
      Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-26 08:55 -0800
        Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-01-26 11:32 -0800
          Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-31 21:57 -0800
            Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-02-01 01:12 -0500
    Re: when is casting (unsigned char*) to (signed char*) dangerous? Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2012-01-26 08:48 -0800

csiph-web