On 31/05/2011, at 7:36 PM, julius wrote:
>
> On 31 May 2011, at 10:00, Alejandro Rodríguez wrote:
>
>> It's more than likely that it has to do with the underlying implementation
>> of NSArray which is surely based on C arrays.
>>
>> NSArray is toll-free bridged with CFArray which being par
On 31 May 2011, at 10:00, Alejandro Rodríguez wrote:
> Hey Julius,
>
> The reason for using NSUInteger on such a high level framework as Cocoa may
> not seem relevant but for the sake of completeness let me go down a road less
> explored by many of the other answers. I think using NSUInteger v
On May 30, 2011, at 6:57 PM, Greg Guerin wrote:
> julius wrote:
>
>> My question is
>> Why did Cocoa developers make NSArray count return NSUInteger?
>
>
> It's impossible to answer with certainty. The person or persons who made
> that decision are not on this list (AFAIK). Nor have they docu
On May 30, 2011, at 9:38 PM, Graham Cox wrote:
> On 31/05/2011, at 11:06 AM, koko wrote:
>
>> Nothing but mental masturbation ... give it a rest ... moderator, do your
>> job, please.
>
>
> Get out of bed the wrong side today?
>
> Quincey is one of the most helpful contributors on the list; y
On 31/05/2011, at 11:06 AM, koko wrote:
> Nothing but mental masturbation ... give it a rest ... moderator, do your
> job, please.
Get out of bed the wrong side today?
Quincey is one of the most helpful contributors on the list; you might remember
that next time you want help. There's always
>Unfortunately, somebody decided a long time ago, the same can't be done for
>integers, because there's no infinite-range numerical space available to
>machine computation (in any way that mainstream hardware supports directly),
>and no single finite-range space that (as in the floating point ca
Nothing but mental masturbation ... give it a rest ... moderator, do your job,
please.
-koko
On May 30, 2011, at 4:43 PM, Quincey Morris wrote:
> On May 30, 2011, at 15:14, julius wrote:
>
>> I'm definitely off to the north coast.
>
> I *wish* people would stop using that old "saving the dis
On 31/05/2011, at 8:57 AM, Greg Guerin wrote:
> julius wrote:
>
>> My question is
>> Why did Cocoa developers make NSArray count return NSUInteger?
>
> In a practical sense, none of this matters. The decision was made long, long
> ago. It is what it is. You're too late to save that sheep fr
julius wrote:
My question is
Why did Cocoa developers make NSArray count return NSUInteger?
It's impossible to answer with certainty. The person or persons who
made that decision are not on this list (AFAIK). Nor have they
documented the rationale behind their design decisions for poste
On May 30, 2011, at 15:14, julius wrote:
> I'm definitely off to the north coast.
I *wish* people would stop using that old "saving the distressed sheep" line to
put an end to a thread. It's happening far too often these days.
___
Cocoa-dev mailing
On 30 May 2011, at 22:34, Quincey Morris wrote:
> On May 30, 2011, at 13:45, julius wrote:
>
>> Hilarity and riot.
>
> Glad to have been of service.
>
>> Here is a nice instance that I think quite germane.
>>
>> The input parameter to NSArray's objectAtIndex: is an NSUInteger.
>> Both these c
Maybe this will assuage your outrage (excuse the lame programmer poetry):
If you were to look at the apis for NSArray and see that indices are signed
integers, you could reasonably conclude that storing/retrieving an object from
a negative index is a legitimate thing to do. That would maybe be
On May 30, 2011, at 13:45, julius wrote:
> Hilarity and riot.
Glad to have been of service.
> Here is a nice instance that I think quite germane.
>
> The input parameter to NSArray's objectAtIndex: is an NSUInteger.
> Both these code snippets work perfectly (they retrieve element 3).
> zS
On 30 May 2011, at 21:56, Dave Zarzycki wrote:
> On May 30, 2011, at 1:45 PM, julius wrote:
>
>>
>> On 30 May 2011, at 20:03,Quincey Morris wrote
>>>
>>> On May 30, 2011, at 08:27, julius wrote:
>>>
All I had hoped was that someone on this list might illuminate the issue
more than
On Mon, 30 May 2011 13:56:38 -0700, Dave Zarzycki said:
>As others have pointed out, this has nothing to do with Objective-C or
>Cocoa. This behavior is true of any C derived language or library. If
>this aspect of C bothers you, then please consider adding -Wconversion
>to your project's build se
On May 30, 2011, at 1:45 PM, julius wrote:
>
> On 30 May 2011, at 20:03,Quincey Morris wrote
>>
>> On May 30, 2011, at 08:27, julius wrote:
>>
>>> All I had hoped was that someone on this list might illuminate the issue
>>> more than has happened so far.
>>
>> The problem isn't really lack of
On 30 May 2011, at 20:03,Quincey Morris wrote
>
> On May 30, 2011, at 08:27, julius wrote:
>
>> All I had hoped was that someone on this list might illuminate the issue
>> more than has happened so far.
>
> The problem isn't really lack of illumination, but that you're not prepared
> to accep
On 30 May 2011, at 16:40, Roland King wrote:
>
> On 30-May-2011, at 11:05 PM, julius wrote:
>
>>
>> On 30 May 2011, at 15:52, Roland King wrote
>>>
>>> On 30-May-2011, at 9:18 PM, julius wrote:
>>>
> They used the datatype which maps onto the thing they are describing,
> arr
On 31/05/2011, at 12:03 AM, julius wrote:
> has the potential to create problems if it skips one's mind
On 05/30/2011 8:40 AM, "Roland King" wrote:
> Whist seeing your side...
You know, we could really take this to the extreme and I could get upset
that Roland started talking about a card gam
A couple of other issues about the use of NSUInteger throughout the
Foundation Framework.
Core Foundation functions tend to use CFIndex and CFRange, both
signed. This is true for CFArray and other collections. If you mix
Foundation and Core Foundation you have to deal with this.
Many C fu
On May 30, 2011, at 08:27, julius wrote:
> All I had hoped was that someone on this list might illuminate the issue more
> than has happened so far.
The problem isn't really lack of illumination, but that you're not prepared to
accept the consequences of the explanation.
Here's my version of t
On 30-May-2011, at 11:05 PM, julius wrote:
>
> On 30 May 2011, at 15:52, Roland King wrote
>>
>> On 30-May-2011, at 9:18 PM, julius wrote:
>>
>>>
They used the datatype which maps onto the thing they are describing,
array elements are non-negative integers, so they used NSUIntege
On 30 May 2011, at 16:02, Graham Cox wrote:
>
> On 31/05/2011, at 12:03 AM, julius wrote:
>
>> has the potential to create problems if it skips one's mind
>
> Well, so does almost anything in life. Coding's no different.
>
>> Of course I find decision to have NSArray count return NSUInteger s
On May 30, 2011, at 7:31 AM, Roland King wrote:
> No. I am saying that semantically the 'size' of an array is a non-negative
> integer and thus the correct way to represent it is with a data type which
> represents non-negative integers.
While that is certainly correct, the counter argument is
On 30 May 2011, Graham Cox wrote
>
> On 30/05/2011, at 9:03 PM, julius wrote:
>
>> Why did Cocoa developers make the count method return NSUInteger?
>
>
> Because you can't have negative numbers of elements in an array.
>
> It's that simple.
Yes but is that the only reason for doing this?
>
.. going back on list ..
On 30-May-2011, at 9:18 PM, julius wrote:
>
> On 30 May 2011, at 12:28, Roland King wrote:
>
>>
>>
>>> In what contexts is that output going to be used?
>>> I think that like me people will tend to use it in contexts to do with
>>> accessing array elements
>>> e.g.
On 30/05/2011, at 9:03 PM, julius wrote:
> Why did Cocoa developers make the count method return NSUInteger?
Because you can't have negative numbers of elements in an array.
It's that simple.
The reason you're running into trouble is not because this type is unsigned,
it's because you are do
> In what contexts is that output going to be used?
> I think that like me people will tend to use it in contexts to do with
> accessing array elements
> e.g. x = [ary objectAtIndex:[ary count]-2];
well if you haven't already confirmed that [ary count ] can never be less than
2, or checked tha
On 30 May 2011, at 12:03, julius wrote:
>
>
> So was it really just because the number of array elements is never -3 that
> the Cocoa developers decided to make NSArray count return type NSUInteger?
>
> Julius
>
You always need to pay close close attention to function/method return types,
On Sun, 29 May 2011 18:15:10 -0400
>
> From: Jeffrey Walton wrote
> As Kyle said, its the C language - signed values are
> promoted/converted (?) to unsigned. So -1 is always greater than 1 (if
> you let it happen). Its really the generated CMP instruction which is
> bitting you. Cast the unsign
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 4:04 PM, julius wrote:
> Hi,
> I have just spent time investigating why
> an if statement involving an [array count] was apparently misbehaving.
>
> The construct was this:
> if(3 < ([zAry count] - 10))
> It delivers a (to me unexpected) result when [zAry count] < 10
On 29/05/2011, at 17:13, Siegfried wrote:
>
> When one of the literals is unsigned, the other is implicitly converted, and
> -1 is the highest int possible.
I'm sorry, I mean operands instead of
"literals"___
Cocoa-dev mailing list (Cocoa-dev@lists.
On Sun, May 29, 2011 at 1:04 PM, julius wrote:
> Hi,
> I have just spent time investigating why
> an if statement involving an [array count] was apparently misbehaving.
>
> The construct was this:
> if(3 < ([zAry count] - 10))
> It delivers a (to me unexpected) result when [zAry count] < 10
On 29/05/2011, at 17:04, julius wrote:
> …
> The reason is that [zAry count] returns a result of type NSUInteger
Exactly.
> …
> Why might the Cocoa developers have chosen to do this?
> …
Not exactly Cocoa developers. In C, considering "uint" an unsigned int variable
set to -1, a statement l
Maybe array indexes and counts are unsigned because you can't have a negative
number of objects in an array?
_murat
On May 29, 2011, at 1:04 PM, julius wrote:
> Hi,
> I have just spent time investigating why
> an if statement involving an [array count] was apparently misbehaving.
>
> The cons
Hi,
I have just spent time investigating why
an if statement involving an [array count] was apparently misbehaving.
The construct was this:
if(3 < ([zAry count] - 10))
It delivers a (to me unexpected) result when [zAry count] < 10.
In fact
if(3 >= ([zAry count] - 10))
also retur
36 matches
Mail list logo
