Re: [HACKERS] Re: your mail
От | Oleg Broytmann |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [HACKERS] Re: your mail |
Дата | |
Msg-id | Pine.SOL2.3.96.SK.990212141925.8485A-100000@sun.med.ru обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [HACKERS] Re: your mail ("D'Arcy" "J.M." Cain <darcy@druid.net>) |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Re: your mail
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, 11 Feb 1999, D'Arcy J.M. Cain wrote: > > should use: signed or unsigned chars, anyone has an idea? > > In all my own code, I always set the compiler option to make char an > unsigned type. For portability I like to know that the behaviour > won't change as long as I carry over my compiler options. I like > that way better than casting since I don't get conflict warnings > for sending unsigned (or signed) char to library functions. Remember, > char, signed char and unsigned char are 3 distinct types even though > char has to behave exactly like one of the other two. Setting it up on > the compiler command line gets around that. > > As for signed vs. unsigned, I don't think it matters that much. I chose > unsigned since I never do signed arithmetic on char and if I ever did I > would like to have the extra keywork to draw attention to it. That is what I think of, and what I usually use - tweak compiler options to unsigned char. So, my conclusion - reject the patch and teach people to change compiler options. Oleg. ---- Oleg Broytmann http://members.xoom.com/phd2/ phd2@earthling.net Programmers don't die, they justGOSUB without RETURN.
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: