Hi Martin! On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 04:52:37PM +0200, Landsmann, Martin wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 12:57:50PM +0200, Ludwig Knüpfer wrote: > > > Am 12. Oktober 2016 09:48:28 MESZ, schrieb Oleg Hahm > > > <oliver.h...@inria.fr>: > > > > as far I'm concerned it has been an undocumented coding convention so > > > > far > > > > to use `int` or `unsigned int` for iterator variables in a loop instead > > > > of > > > > fixed width integer types. Does anybody object to adding this to the > > > > coding > > > > conventions explicitly? > > > What about `size_t`? > > I don't see a reason against `size_t` - but also no good reason that speaks > > for it. What's the rationale? > size_t is suited best to be used for iterating array indices and never > overflow holding them [1]. > > [1] http://stackoverflow.com/a/2550799
Sorry, I don't get this. Can you elaborate?
Cheers,
Oleg
--
printk(KERN_WARNING MYNAM ": (time to go bang on somebodies door)\n");
linux-2.6.6/drivers/message/fusion/mptctl.c
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list devel@riot-os.org https://lists.riot-os.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
