I can see where they're coming from, signed integers come with all sorts of caveats in C and C++ from overflow being undefined behaviour (yet modulo-math often makes sense when integers are used as array indices) to bit twiddling surprises. "Almost always unsigned" sounds like a good rule to me to avoid such pitfalls, especially when 'common math stuff' is usually done with floats or special fixed-point formats.
Overflow being UB is not something you run into easily with typical math, index and size uses (not as often as your run into unsigned issues, in my experience). Yes, bit-twiddling should be unsigned, but it is very easy to make this code isolated, and convert from signed values storing these bits, if necessary.
Comments
I can see where they're coming from, signed integers come with all sorts of caveats in C and C++ from overflow being undefined behaviour (yet modulo-math often makes sense when integers are used as array indices) to bit twiddling surprises. "Almost always unsigned" sounds like a good rule to me to avoid such pitfalls, especially when 'common math stuff' is usually done with floats or special fixed-point formats.
Overflow being UB is not something you run into easily with typical math, index and size uses (not as often as your run into unsigned issues, in my experience). Yes, bit-twiddling should be unsigned, but it is very easy to make this code isolated, and convert from signed values storing these bits, if necessary.
But I am going to defer to authority here: http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2019/p142...