Re: [Xen-devel] [PATCH RFC] CODING_STYLE: document intended usage of types

[Andrew Cooper <andrew.cooper3@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On 19/02/18 08:44, Jan Beulich wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@xxxxxxxx>
>
> --- a/CODING_STYLE
> +++ b/CODING_STYLE
> @@ -88,6 +88,26 @@ Braces should be omitted for blocks with
>  if ( condition )
>      single_statement();
>  
> +Types
> +-----
> +
> +Use basic C types and C standard mandated typedef-s where possible (and
> +with preference in this order).  This in particular means to avoid u8,
> +u16, etc despite those types continuing to exist in our code base.
> +Fixed width types should only be used when a fixed width quantity is
> +meant (which for example may be a value read from or to be written to a
> +register).
> +
> +When signedness matters, qualify plain char, short, int, long, and
> +long long with "signed" or "unsigned".  Signedness is specifically
> +considered to matter when the valid value range of a variable covers
> +only non-negative values.  The prime example of such is a variable used
> +to index an array (negative array indexes, while they may occur, are
> +rather rare).

As is evident from the other threads on the subject, I am very
definitely -1 for littering our codebase with signed in cases like this.

IMO they do nothing but harm readibility.

~Andrew

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel