News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Parameterized types in C using the new tag compatibility ... by poly2it on Friday June 27, 2025 @12:55PM (#44398333)
I've of course read his argument before, and I think it might be more applicable to C++. I exclusively program in C, and in that regard, the relevant aspects as far as I can tell wouldn't be clearly in favour of a signed type. I also think his discussion on iterator signedness mixes issues with improper bounds checking and attributes it to the size type signedness. What remains I cannot see justify using the a signed type other than "just because". I'm not sure it's applicable to C.
Re:Parameterized types in C using the new tag compatibility ... by uecker on Friday June 27, 2025 @01:51PM (#44398813)
I also prefer signed types in C for sizes and indices. You can screen for overflow bugs easily using UBSan (or use it to prevent exploitation).