Article View: net.lang.c
Article #9723Re: Signed Chars - What Foolishness Revisited!
From: Metro T. Sauper
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1986 15:11
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 1986 15:11
23 lines
1400 bytes
1400 bytes
I would just like to point out that there are actually two issues which
are being argued. They are actually two different topics.
1. Should characters be signed or unsigned by default.
2. Should the character type macros/subroutines support all possible
values of type char.
The first question is compiler related, the second is library related.
My own preferences follows:
1. Since the "c" language has an "unsigned" modifier, and not a "signed"
modifier, I would much rather have a signed character by default and
be able to define it to be "unsigned char" if needs be.
2. The ctype routines are trivial at best, and with all the effort put
to arguing which way they should work, you could have rewritten them
to do whatever you would like them to do.
Metro T. Sauper, Jr.
..!ihnp4!ll1!bpa!asi!metro
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<26@asi.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!cbmvax!bpa!asi!metroReferences:
<8776@duke.duke.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!cbmvax!bpa!asi!metro From: metro@asi.UUCP (Metro T. Sauper) Newsgroups: net.lang.c,net.micro.pc Subject: Re: Signed Chars - What Foolishness Revisited! Message-ID: <26@asi.UUCP> Date: Wed, 5-Nov-86 10:11:30 EST Article-I.D.: asi.26 Posted: Wed Nov 5 10:11:30 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 5-Nov-86 22:41:11 EST References: <8776@duke.duke.UUCP> Organization: Assessment Systems, Inc., Philadelphia, PA Lines: 23 Summary: isascii() && signed.