> > I think C doesn't guarantee that 'size_t' is at least as large as a 'signed int' > That doesn't matter, because size_t is large enough to hold any array in

> > I think C doesn't guarantee that 'size_t' is at least as large as a 'signed int' > That doesn't matter, because size_t is large enough to hold any array index (that's kind of[0] the defining property of size_t), so any array index in a signed int can be safely converted to size_t. Well, the Go code we're discussing has nothing to do with arrays or array indices, so `size_t` doesn't help here. Go look at the code :) It's a generic function for doing binary search, which accepts an `int` as a function argument, specifying the search size. The code is then doing: h := int(uint(i+j) >> 1) // avoid overflow when computing h Replacing the Go expression `uint(i+j)` with `(size_t)i+(size_t)j` in C like morelisp proposed would not work correctly if `size_t` is smaller than `int`. That's the point I was making.