Re: better name for var_integer et.al.

[Joel Brobecker <brobecker@gnat.com>]

> >Ada calls such numbers "Positive". var_positive might be a good name.
> 
> Or var_ordinal_number (vs cardinal number)?

Yew! (sorry).

I prefer var_positive. Or var_nonzero_positive.

> >>> /* Like var_uinteger but signed.  *VAR is an int.  The user can type 0
> >>>    to mean "unlimited", which is stored in *VAR as INT_MAX.  */
> >>> var_integer,
> 
> Well, the "set backtrace limit 100" bug comes from a comparison between 
> signed (frame->limit == -1) vs unsigned (backtrace_limit == 100) 
> comparison which is from a var_uinteger.
> 
> Using var_integer "fixes" it but lets a user enter -100.

What would it mean, at the semantic level if the user entered
such a value? Shouldn't this value always be positive, with a
zero value being infinity?

Anyway, if we need to keep this kind of variables, how about

var_nonzero_integer (in line with one of the proposals above).

> >>> /* ZeroableInteger.  *VAR is an int.  Like Unsigned Integer except
> >>>    that zero really means zero.  */
> >>> var_zinteger,
> >
> >
> >var_integer? (assuming we get rid of the non-zero signed integer)

And then this one could become var_integer   (an integer range contains
value zero by default, so no need to emphasize it with the 'z', IMHO).

-- 
Joel