[riot-devel] Coding conventions amendment

Kaspar Schleiser kaspar at schleiser.de
Thu Oct 13 22:42:11 CEST 2016


Hi,

On 10/13/2016 09:43 PM, Kees Bakker wrote:
>>> Does anybody object to adding this to the coding
>>> >> conventions explicitly?
>> > What about `size_t`?
> +1 for size_t

Well, any convention would need careful wording.

```
for (uint32_t timeout = 1; timeout < (10LU*1000*1000); timeout *= 2) {
	if(try()) break;
}
```

... cannot blindly by convention converted to size_t as loop variable.

IMHO this example also answers Oleg's initial concern: sometimes int or
unsigned int or size_t just don't work.

Kaspar


More information about the devel mailing list