hehehe...it's probably the old truth that it's harder to type "unsigned"
or "unsigned long integer" than just "int".

Have you noticed that most of M$ installation programs wrap around 2GB
boundaries when reporting free space on the harddrive?

>   Unsigned integers are (of course) part of the ANSI C standard, so I don't
> understand why it should be a portability problem.
>   It shouldn't be a performance problem. AFAIK in most of currently used
> computers signed and unsigned integers are equally fast.
> 
> --
> main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
> ):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message

I have learnt this: _Always_ use unsigned types as default. Use signed
types _only_ of you really need negative numbers. You will save yourself a
lot of trouble.

-- 
main(i,_){for(_?--i,main(i+2,"FhhQHFIJD|FQTITFN]zRFHhhTBFHhhTBFysdB"[i]
):5;i&&_>1;printf("%s",_-70?_&1?"[]":" ":(_=0,"\n")),_/=2);} /*- Warp -*/

Post a reply to this message