Displaying 3 results from an estimated 3 matches for "rarionale".
Did you mean:
nationale
2019 Jun 11
2
[RFC] Coding Standards: "prefer `int` for regular arithmetic, use `unsigned` only for bitmask and when you intend to rely on wrapping behavior."
...either!
Yet we're still using it as an index, including to index into objects/array.
> I have yet to be convinced by the c++ community's very recent desire to
> switch everything to signed integers and would be very unhappy to see us
> switch without considerably more motivating rarionale.
>
Note that this is not about "switching" anything: there is no standard in
LLVM right now (as far as I know) and the codebase is inconsistent (I am
using `int` in general for a while I believe).
--
Mehdi
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 11:04 PM Mehdi AMINI <joker.eph at gmai...
2019 Jun 10
3
[RFC] Coding Standards: "prefer `int` for regular arithmetic, use `unsigned` only for bitmask and when you intend to rely on wrapping behavior."
On Mon, Jun 10, 2019 at 10:32 AM Aaron Ballman via llvm-dev <
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2019, 7:16 PM Jake Ehrlich via llvm-dev <
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> I'm in the same situation James is in and thus have the same bias but
>> I'll +1 that comment nevertheless. I think I prefer using size_t or the
2019 Jun 11
2
[RFC] Coding Standards: "prefer `int` for regular arithmetic, use `unsigned` only for bitmask and when you intend to rely on wrapping behavior."
...luding to index into objects/array.
>>
>
>>
>>
>>> I have yet to be convinced by the c++ community's very recent desire to
>>> switch everything to signed integers and would be very unhappy to see us
>>> switch without considerably more motivating rarionale.
>>>
>>
>> Note that this is not about "switching" anything: there is no standard in
>> LLVM right now (as far as I know) and the codebase is inconsistent (I am
>> using `int` in general for a while I believe).
>>
>
> Glad to hear there's n...