"moof" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > In trying to reduce the number of warnings emitted by newer versions of > gcc, I noticed that practically all strings are defined as either > unsigned char or u_char (depending on which bits of source one's > looking at.) This spews tremendous amounts of warnings when using > strncpy on any C compiler that uses ANSI - i.e. most of them these > days. > > Is this a holdover from the days of pre-ansi C? If so, can the majority > of such strings be changed to be 'just' char? > > Fortunately, most of the remaining warnings are fairly innocuous - lots > of unused parameters, a fair amount of comparison between signed and > unsigned [possibly due to the use of signed chars, possibly not], a > decent amount of missing initializers in structs, a few type-punning > problems, and a very few 'may be used uninitialized' bits.
>From my experience, signed chars are a source of trouble. Regards, Ulrich _______________________________________________ questions mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ntp.isc.org/mailman/listinfo/questions
