The Google style sounds pretty good to me.
On 04/07/2019 07:11, Gerald Squelart wrote: > Recently I coded something with a not-very-important slow-changing > rarely-used positive number: `unsigned mGeneration;` > My reviewer commented: "Please use a type with an explicit size, such as > uint32_t. (General mozilla style; you don't see a bare "unsigned" around > much)" > > I had never heard of this (in 4+ years), so I did a bit of research: > > - I found plenty of `unsigned`s around, more than `uint32_t`s. > > - I can't see anything about that in our coding style guides [1, 2]. > > - Our latest coding style [1] points at Google's, which has a section about > Integer Types [3], and the basic gist is: Use plain `int` for "not-too-big" > numbers, int64_t for "big" numbers, intXX_t if you need a precise size; never > use any unsigned type unless you work with bitfields or need 2^N overflow (in > particular, don't use unsigned for always-positive numbers, use signed and > assertions instead). > > So, questions: > 1. Do we have a written style I missed somewhere? > 2. Do we have an unwritten style? (In which case I think we should write it > down.) > 3. What do we think of the Google style, especially the aversion to unsigned? > > Cheers, > Gerald > > > [1] > https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Developer_guide/Coding_Style > [2] https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Mozilla/Using_CXX_in_Mozilla_code > [3] https://google.github.io/styleguide/cppguide.html#Integer_Types > _______________________________________________ > dev-platform mailing list > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
