Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 03 Jan 2005 13:41:27 -0800 | | From | "H. Peter Anvin" <> | | Subject | Re: [3/8] kill gen_init_cpio.c printk() of size_t warning |
| |
William Lee Irwin III wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 03, 2005 at 09:09:48PM +0000, H. Peter Anvin wrote: > >>Dear Wrongbot, >>Bullshit. Signed is promoted to unsigned. > > I'm not sure who you're responding to here, but gcc emitted an actual > warning and I was only attempting to carry out the minimal effort > necessary to silence it. I'm not really interested in creating or > being involved with controversy, just silencing the core build in the > least invasive and so on way possible, leaving deeper drivers/ issues > to the resolution of the true underlying problems. > > I don't have anything to do with the code excerpt above; I merely > followed the style of the other unsigned integer coercions in the file. >
I was not responding to you, your stuff is perfectly sane.
The claim from the Wrongbot was that "foo + 1" is bad when foo is a size_t. This is utter bullshit, since that's EXACTLY equivalent to:
foo + (size_t)1
... because of promotion rules.
-hpa - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |