Re: [Emacs-diffs] trunk r114450: * dispnew.c (clear_glyph_row, copy_row_except_pointers):

[Paul Eggert]

Daniel Colascione wrote:
> Signed integers have undefined overflow behavior and sometimes
> result in less efficient code. If anything, we should prefer unsigned
> integer types.

The general Emacs style is to prefer signed integers to unsigned.
That's why the Emacs source code prefers ptrdiff_t to size_t, for
example.  This is not a style that I originally favored, but I've
learned to like its advantages.  Most importantly, it leads to
more-understandable code, since signed arithmetic is closer to how
people normally understand numbers: it's counterintutive that a
large positive number X can satisfy the predicate (X < -1), which
can happen with unsigned arithmetic.  And as a side effect, signed
arithmetic often leads to more-efficient code, since the compiler
can take advantage of the fact that behavior is undefined on
overflow.

There are a few exceptions to the general style; one is bitmasks
(where the integers are not really numbers, but are bit strings).
Another is char, where unsigned char is often used, as it's
simpler (and typically, this doesn't have the problem with -1
anyway).  Still another are hash values and a few other places
where the performance advantage of unsigned arithmetic is
compelling.  But generally, we prefer signed integers.