Hi Paul, > (seen_triple, canonicalize_filename_mode): Prefer signed to > unsigned types where either will do, as they avoid some glitches > in comparisons and can trap on overflow when debugging.
Please, please, can we have typedef names for these signed types that are supposed to only have values >= 0 ? I object to losing information that is important for reviewing the correctness of the code and of future modifications. Refer to this thread, where I voiced this objection first: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2017-06/msg00024.html Then it sounded like you had understood my arguments, and we only need to pick a good name: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2019-12/msg00079.html Bruno
