Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: > On 17:45 Sun 15 Oct , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote: >> Hi Sasha, >> >> Sasha Khapyorsky wrote: >>> Hi Evgeny, >>> >>> On 16:31 Sun 15 Oct , Yevgeny Kliteynik wrote: >>>> Hi Hal >>>> >>>> This patch fixes a few data type problems with OSM on >>>> 64-bit Windows machines. >>> Could you explain what those problems are? >> >> Basically, in all three files the problem was assigning >> the result of pointer arithmetics (which is __int64) to >> an int/uint variable. >> Casting to int is ok because, as I said, this result is >> actually string length, index in table, or index in string, >> so no range check is required. > > So isn't it better to shut-up compiler warnings/whatever with appropriate > warning level flags instead of putting confused castings in the code?
Personally, I don't like the idea of decreasing compiler's "suspiciousness" - it will result in writing less portable code. Just imagine what would it take to port OSM from Linux to Windows, if the Linux code wasn't originally compiled with a strict compiler. > (I know there are couple of such already, but I don't think it was a > good idea). IMO, small price to pay. -- Yevgeny > Sasha > _______________________________________________ openib-general mailing list openib-general@openib.org http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general To unsubscribe, please visit http://openib.org/mailman/listinfo/openib-general
