[Wireshark-dev] FYI: Status of gcc warnings in epan/dissectors

2007-03-26 Thread Stephen Fisher
FYI: Update on warnings in epan/dissectors under gcc 4.0 Below is a list of the number of warnings remaining in epan/dissectors when using gcc 4.0. There are 3,915 warnings in this directory across 163 files. Excluding files that show warnings as being in the .cnf filename (such as asn genera

Re: [Wireshark-dev] FYI: Status of gcc warnings in epan/dissectors

2007-03-27 Thread Jeff Morriss
Stephen Fisher wrote: > Almost all of the warnings I've fixed so far are "sign mismatches" > between guint8* and (g)char* :(. 552 of the 795 remaining warnings > outside of the .cnf files are this problem. Is casting away signed and unsigned really the way to go with that? ___

Re: [Wireshark-dev] FYI: Status of gcc warnings in epan/dissectors

2007-03-27 Thread Stephen Fisher
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 03:04:27PM +0800, Jeff Morriss wrote: > > Stephen Fisher wrote: > > Almost all of the warnings I've fixed so far are "sign mismatches" > > between guint8* and (g)char* :(. 552 of the 795 remaining warnings > > outside of the .cnf files are this problem. > > Is casting a

Re: [Wireshark-dev] FYI: Status of gcc warnings in epan/dissectors

2007-03-28 Thread Jeff Morriss
Stephen Fisher wrote: > On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 03:04:27PM +0800, Jeff Morriss wrote: >> Stephen Fisher wrote: >>> Almost all of the warnings I've fixed so far are "sign mismatches" >>> between guint8* and (g)char* :(. 552 of the 795 remaining warnings >>> outside of the .cnf files are this pr

Re: [Wireshark-dev] FYI: Status of gcc warnings in epan/dissectors

2007-03-28 Thread Guy Harris
Stephen Fisher wrote: > Well, since (g)char defaults to unsigned on most platforms, No, it doesn't. "char" defaults to *signed* on most platforms, because 1) the PDP-11's "movb" instruction sign-extended, so "char" was made signed on the PDP-11 and 2) the VAX C implementation

Re: [Wireshark-dev] FYI: Status of gcc warnings in epan/dissectors

2007-03-28 Thread Stephen Fisher
On Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 06:45:01PM +0800, Jeff Morriss wrote: > That's why I suggested turning on "-Wno-pointer-sign" (because I don't > have a better idea and I don't particularly like the idea of just > casting them all away). Ok, I can go ahead and remove my casts and add the -Wno-pointer-si