Message-ID:	<3923FEC5.B836D26B@mtu-net.ru>
Date:	Thu, 18 May 2000 18:31:33 +0400
From:	"Alexei A. Frounze" <alex DOT fru AT mtu-net DOT ru>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language:	ru,en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Cc:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: C++, complex, etc
References:	<Pine DOT SUN DOT 3 DOT 91 DOT 1000518173156 DOT 15189C-100000 AT is>
X-Recipient:	eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> On Thu, 18 May 2000, Alexei A. Frounze wrote:
> 
> > Does that mean I need to put (int) and (size_t), if I want to assign a value
> > of int to size_t and vice virsa?
> 
> In general, you don't want to assign int to size_t or vice versa.  Mixing
> signed and unsigned means trouble.

If I'm 100% sure my "int" is positive (greater or equal 0 and less than
INT_MAX), will I have problems?

> If you pass an int to a function that expects size_t, and the prototype
> is visible to the compiler, the compiler will do the casting for you, but
> it is up to you to make sure this works.  For example, passing a negative
> value to a function that expects a size_t argument is usually not a good
> idea ;-).
> 
> > OK, if it's so important, how many bugs are caused by not caring about
> > size_t?
> 
> Plenty.  That's why the feature of GCC whereby it warns about comparing
> signed and unsigned is so important.

Again, if I have "int" in the 0...INT_MAX range, do I have those problems?

> > I don't mean in my own programs. Let's say in M$'...
> 
> I have never looked at any of Microsoft's sources.

Never mind. They have a lot of trouble with other things. :)

-- 
Alexei A. Frounze
-----------------------------------------
Homepage: http://alexfru.chat.ru
Mirror:   http://members.xoom.com/alexfru

- Raw text -