Why is int rather than unsigned int used for C and C++ for loops?

by

Using int is more correct from a logical point of view for indexing an array.

unsigned semantic in C and C++ doesn’t really mean “not negative” but it’s more like “bitmask” or “modulo integer”.

To understand why unsigned is not a good type for a “non-negative” number please consider these totally absurd statements:

  • Adding a possibly negative integer to a non-negative integer you get a non-negative integer
  • The difference of two non-negative integers is always a non-negative integer
  • Multiplying a non-negative integer by a negative integer you get a non-negative result

Obviously none of the above phrases make any sense… but it’s how C and C++ unsigned semantic indeed works.

Actually using an unsigned type for the size of containers is a design mistake of C++ and unfortunately we’re now doomed to use this wrong choice forever (for backward compatibility). You may like the name “unsigned” because it’s similar to “non-negative” but the name is irrelevant and what counts is the semantic… and unsigned is very far from “non-negative”.

For this reason when coding most loops on vectors my personally preferred form is:

for (int i=0,n=v.size(); i<n; i++) {
    ...
}

(of course assuming the size of the vector is not changing during the iteration and that I actually need the index in the body as otherwise the for (auto& x : v)... is better).

This running away from unsigned as soon as possible and using plain integers has the advantage of avoiding the traps that are a consequence of unsigned size_t design mistake. For example consider:

// draw lines connecting the dots
for (size_t i=0; i<pts.size()-1; i++) {
    drawLine(pts[i], pts[i+1]);
}

the code above will have problems if the pts vector is empty because pts.size()-1 is a huge nonsense number in that case. Dealing with expressions where a < b-1 is not the same as a+1 < b even for commonly used values is like dancing in a minefield.

Historically the justification for having size_t unsigned is for being able to use the extra bit for the values, e.g. being able to have 65535 elements in arrays instead of just 32767 on 16-bit platforms. In my opinion even at that time the extra cost of this wrong semantic choice was not worth the gain (and if 32767 elements are not enough now then 65535 won’t be enough for long anyway).

Unsigned values are great and very useful, but NOT for representing container size or for indexes; for size and index regular signed integers work much better because the semantic is what you would expect.

Unsigned values are the ideal type when you need the modulo arithmetic property or when you want to work at the bit level.

More Related Contents:

  1. Why is a negative int greater than unsigned int? [duplicate]
  2. Difference between unsigned and unsigned int in C
  3. C Unsigned int providing a negative value?
  4. C reverse bits in unsigned integer
  5. C: Why is counter not resetting to 0 in for loop [closed]
  6. What is my C code not printing # in staircase pattern, this is from hackerrank, I did not pass all test cases, but i can't point out why?
  7. I need help understanding this code in C [closed]
  8. Variable redeclaration in c in loop and outside loop?
  9. What is size_t in C?
  10. Why does the order of the loops affect performance when iterating over a 2D array?
  11. int main() vs void main() in C [duplicate]
  12. Is unsigned integer subtraction defined behavior?
  13. Rounding integer division (instead of truncating)
  14. Effect of semicolon after ‘for’ loop
  15. Which ordering of nested loops for iterating over a 2D array is more efficient [duplicate]
  16. bit shifting with unsigned long type produces wrong results
  17. What is the full “for” loop syntax in C?
  18. Range of values in C Int and Long 32 – 64 bits
  19. Why does strchr take an int for the char to be found?
  20. performance of unsigned vs signed integers
  21. In C, why is sizeof(char) 1, when ‘a’ is an int?
  22. What does a ‘for’ loop without curly braces do?
  23. C: Casting minimum 32-bit integer (-2147483648) to float gives positive number (2147483648.0)
  24. Two semicolons inside a for-loop parentheses
  25. In C, why can’t an integer value be assigned to an int* the same way a string value can be assigned to a char*?
  26. Unsigned values in C
  27. Convert char array to a int number in C
  28. What’s the best way to do a reverse ‘for’ loop with an unsigned index?
  29. C For loop skips first iteration and bogus number from loop scanf
  30. Define integer (int); What’s the default value?

Leave a Comment