lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1997]   [Sep]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Style question: comparison between signed and unsigned?
On Wed, 24 Sep 1997 brianh@risky.bit3.com wrote:

> Um, how is this worse then having tons of implicit and undocumented
> typecasts hidden throughout the code?

Implicit type casts follow strict rules. Once people start explicitly
type casting *everything* you have to assume they knew what they
were doing - and got it right.

> Dumb programmers write dumb programs. Granted. Smart programmers take
> advantage of this behavior, and only typecast when this warning comes up
> and they have looked at the situation and decided yes, the conversion is
> what they mean (or changed the types of other variables to the correct
> type).

We all know that there are those of us (you?) who can get it right
and that the majority can't be trusted. I want to stand a chance
of QA'ing that code...

Mike

--
.----------------------------------------------------------------------.
| Mike Jagdis | Internet: mailto:mike@roan.co.uk |
| Roan Technology Ltd. | |
| 54A Peach Street, Wokingham | Telephone: +44 118 989 0403 |
| RG40 1XG, ENGLAND | Fax: +44 118 989 1195 |
`----------------------------------------------------------------------'


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [W:0.056 / U:0.128 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site