On Fri, 30 Apr 2021 at 18:31, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii.nakryiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 6:05 AM Brendan Jackman <jackmanb@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Note: I feel a bit guilty about the fact that this makes the reader > > think about implicit conversions. Nobody likes thinking about that. > > > > But explicit casts don't really help with clarity: > > > > return (int)min(cnt, (int64_t)INT_MAX); // ugh > > > > I'd go with > > if (cnt > INT_MAX) > return INT_MAX; > > return cnt; Sure, it has all the same implicit casts/promotions but I guess it's clearer anyway. > If you don't mind, I can patch it up while applying? Yes please do, thanks!
