Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [IDEA+RFC] Possible solution for min()/max() war | From | Andreas Schwab <> | Date | 28 Aug 2001 22:34:54 +0200 |
| |
Brad Chapman <kakadu_croc@yahoo.com> writes:
|> Everyone, |> |> From reading this thread, I believe I have come up with several reasons, |> IMHO, why the old min()/max() macros were not usable: |> |> - They did not take into account non-typesafe comparisons |> - They were too generic |> - Some versions, IIRC, relied on typeof() |> - They did not take into account signed/unsigned conversions |> |> I have also discovered one problem with the new three-arg min()/max() |> macro: it forces both arguments to be the same, thus preventing signed/unsigned |> comparisons.
There is no such thing as signed/unsigned comparision in C. Any comparison is either signed or unsigned, depending on whether the common type of arguments after applying the usual arithmetic conversions is signed or unsigned.
|> Thus, I have a humble idea: add another type argument!
This does not bye you anything because the there can only be one common type anyway.
Andreas.
-- Andreas Schwab "And now for something SuSE Labs completely different." Andreas.Schwab@suse.de SuSE GmbH, Schanzäckerstr. 10, D-90443 Nürnberg Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |