Re: Rethinking octave_idx_type

[John W. Eaton]

On 11/25/2016 12:33 PM, Mike Miller wrote:

> Do you have a reason to prefer a signed type rather than an unsigned
> size_t? Using a size_t would make Array<T> more compatible with STL
> container definitions.

We have a number of places where we use -1 to indicate "not defined". 
So as a first pass, using a signed type will be easier.  Once that works 
we could consider just using size_t and fixing the places where negative 
values are used or possible.

jwe