next topic »

[Reply #15 on:]

Personally I use byte, because pin numbers are indeed unsigned, and don't go over 255.

But does for example analogRead(pin#) function cast it as a int size value inside the function? And as you said a pin number declared as a const anyway doesn't occupy any memory space on it's own, only by the thing that reference it?

Lefty

[Reply #16 on:]

Actually pin numbers, as used with 'digitalWrite(12, HIGH)', are in fact specified as being of type 'uint8_t' so the compiler will down convert the 'int' to an 'uint8_t' for you.

But technically you should be specifying pins as 'const uint8_t pinANALOG = A0' as an example.

[Reply #17 on:]

Actually pin numbers, as used with 'digitalWrite(12, HIGH)', are in fact specified as being of type 'uint8_t' so the compiler will down convert the 'int' to an 'uint8_t' for you.

But technically you should be specifying pins as 'const uint8_t pinANALOG = A0' as an example.

Ah got it, thank you.

Lefty

[Reply #18 on:]

But technically you should be specifying pins as 'const uint8_t pinANALOG = A0' as an example.

In other words, "const byte".

[Reply #19 on:]

But technically you should be specifying pins as 'const uint8_t pinANALOG = A0' as an example.

In other words, "const byte".

But of course now I've learned that doesn't save any real space over using const int as applied to pin number use. 

Lefty

[Reply #20 on:]

My problem with 'byte' is it doesn't tell me enough about it.

I believe it is a synonym for 'unsigned char' (because its different on different platforms), but I'm never certain and alway find myself doing the double-check. 

I much prefer 'uint8_t' as it's easier to know what you're getting and is the same everywhere I want to be.

[Reply #21 on:]

That's fine, but the core type is "unsigned char" as shown here in stdint.h:

Code:

/** \ingroup avr_stdint
    8-bit unsigned type. */

typedef unsigned char uint8_t;

You just have to remember that "unsigned char" is an 8-bit unsigned type.

Using uint8_t is one typedef away from the core type.

This is obviously a style issue, but for me, I prefer to remember that. It's like saying:

"I want to call a dog a MammalWith2LegsThatBarks because that tells me more about it."

OK, but it's really a dog.

I don't want to start a "style war" here, hey next we'll be arguing about GOTO.

[Reply #22 on:]

I much prefer 'uint8_t' as it's easier to know what you're getting and is the same everywhere I want to be.

If they have the typedef I quoted. If not, it's an unsigned char.

Hey, wait, I just shot myself in the foot here. I should be using "unsigned char" and not "byte". Oh well.

[Reply #23 on:]

That's fine, but the core type is "unsigned char" as shown here in stdint.h:

Code:

/** \ingroup avr_stdint
    8-bit unsigned type. */

typedef unsigned char uint8_t;

You just have to remember that "unsigned char" is an 8-bit unsigned type.

Using uint8_t is one typedef away from the core type.

This is obviously a style issue, but for me, I prefer to remember that. It's like saying:

"I want to call a dog a MammalWith2LegsThatBarks because that tells me more about it."

OK, but it's really a dog.

I don't want to start a "style war" here, hey next we'll be arguing about GOTO.

You own a two legged dog that barks? Post a video or it isn't true.   

Lefty

[Reply #24 on:]

I was very emotional when I wrote that.

[Reply #25 on:]

Nick - I'm not sure what your getting at or if you're upset or not.

Just saying for me it's ambiguous as to if it's signed or unsigned (unless I look it up) where as 'uint8_t' it's clear that it's unsigned and is unsigned on all platforms where as 'byte' if expressed at all can be either.

[Reply #26 on:]

I'm only upset that I thought a dog had two legs.

[Reply #27 on:]

I'm only upset that I thought a dog had two legs.

Well they do have two legs, plus two more. 

[Reply #28 on:]

I think many people who know better, sometimes just use int instead, when trying to help someone to whom uint8_t or--even byte--would cause additional confusion.  One can't learn everything at once...

[Reply #29 on:]

Well they do have two legs, plus two more. 

Two legs, squared?