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


Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #26351

Re: Dimension of a matrix

From Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP>
Newsgroups comp.arch.embedded
Subject Re: Dimension of a matrix
Date 2017-03-30 18:07 +0000
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <objhgl$rv2$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (7 earlier) <ob949v$ub1$1@dont-email.me> <obhjhm$i1p$1@dont-email.me> <obhjtu$i7n$1@dont-email.me> <87k277cw3c.fsf@nightsong.com> <obid4h$78q$2@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


On 2017-03-30, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote:
> On 30/03/17 04:55, Paul Rubin wrote:
>> Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> writes:
>>> If I had my way, integers would be unsigned by default in all of today's
>>> programming languages and you would have to ask for a signed integer if
>>> you wanted one.
>> 
>> What happens if you subtract 3 from 2?  Are these unsigneds supposed to
>> represent natural numbers, so you throw an exception if you get a
>> negative result?  Or are you saying all languages should use twos
>> complement wraparound arithmetic including the ones that have exact
>> integers now?
>> 

If you think your variable might go negative, you use a signed integer
otherwise you use an unsigned integer.

>
> Presumably he uses signed integers in situations where it makes sense to
> subtract 3 from 2, and in other situations he simply does not subtract 3
> from 2.  Making your "noOfOranges" variable signed does not let you
> subtract 3 oranges from 2 oranges.
>

Exactly. You pick the data type which most closely models the problem
you are trying to solve. Picking a signed integer when you know your
data is always going to be positive is not a good match if unsigned
integers are available in your chosen language.

In my code (both work and hobbyist) I use unsigned values vastly
more frequently than I do signed values and another reason is that
signed integers have caused security issues in the past.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world

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


Thread

Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-23 18:17 -0500
  Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-23 23:21 -0700
    Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-24 09:18 +0100
      Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-24 18:24 +0000
        Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-24 19:32 -0500
          Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2017-03-25 09:59 +0100
          Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 13:08 -0500
        Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-25 01:57 +0100
          Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-25 18:34 +1100
            Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-26 23:53 +0000
              Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-27 09:51 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-27 20:19 +1100
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-27 12:17 +0200
          Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-25 09:20 -0700
        Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-03-24 23:14 -0400
          Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-25 11:07 -0500
            Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-03-26 05:45 -0400
              Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2017-03-26 13:14 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-26 11:08 -0700
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2017-03-26 20:24 +0200
              Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-26 15:16 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-27 00:09 +0000
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-26 19:43 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-27 16:57 +0100
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-27 11:53 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-27 22:04 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-27 18:32 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-28 11:03 +1100
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-27 22:07 +0100
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-27 23:42 -0700
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-28 09:22 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-28 00:42 -0700
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-28 09:07 +0100
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-28 19:34 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-29 11:39 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-28 19:29 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-29 10:31 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-30 00:23 +0000
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-29 19:31 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Phil Martel <pomartel@comcast.net> - 2017-03-30 11:51 -0400
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-30 19:16 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-31 09:21 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-28 14:19 -0500
    Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-24 11:05 -0500
      Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-24 17:33 +0100
        Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-24 12:09 -0500
      Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 13:09 -0500
    Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 13:05 -0500
  Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-24 09:20 +0100
    Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 13:12 -0500
      Re: Dimension of a matrix Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2017-03-25 20:08 +0100
        Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 15:17 -0500
          Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-26 17:32 +0200
            Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-26 11:55 -0500
              Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-26 21:23 +0200
                Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-29 19:36 -0500
                Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-30 00:36 +0000
                Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-29 19:55 -0700
                Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-30 09:49 +0200
                Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-30 18:07 +0000
                Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-30 09:47 +0200
  Re: Dimension of a matrix Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2017-03-25 19:08 +0100
    Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 15:21 -0500
      Re: Dimension of a matrix Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2017-03-26 14:43 +0200

csiph-web