Jan Engelhardt wrote: > On Mar 5 2007 19:12, Michael Tokarev wrote: > >> Date: Mon, 5 Mar 2007 19:12:51 +0300 (MSK) >> From: Michael Tokarev <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: undisclosed-recipients: ; > > I have no clue what you sent it to, so I added linux-kernel again.
Oops.. I forgot to add the To: header (it was only sent to lkml). ][ > In case we wanted to use different types, we would also have to > change the accompanying %lu into %llu. Only changing jif to u64 will > cause a problem, as the compiler does _not_ automatically > promote/demote types in varargs that already have a certain size. In > other words, Sure thing, the change will be needed. But the thing is - with the cast in place, compiler will be completely silent, while w/o the cast it will produce a warning (or at least it's able to). Generally, casts are bad, that's the point. Especially redundrand ones like here. As a side note, I dislike when people remove casts from functions returning void*. For example, struct somestruct *foo; foo = (struct somestruct *)kmalloc(sizeof(struct somestruct)); With the cast in place, the compiler will warn if somestruct will be changed to something else, but without the cast, the compiler will happily accept the (now wrong) line. [] > will throw a warning (rightfully if you ask me). Yes, that's what i was referring to when said "let the compiler do some work for us". /mjt - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
