On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 03:07:30AM +0200, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
> Would the compiler (or possibly other compilers) give out a warning that a
> test was always true?
Unlikely, that would set off code like:
#define DEBUG 1
[...]
if(DEBUG)
printf("some debug info");
Which isn't perhaps the
On Tue, May 22, 2007, Peter Hartley wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Having just downloaded GCC 4.2.0 and discovered that it can't build
> OpenSSL (not even in the snapshots AFAICT), I'd like to offer a possible
> solution.
>
> The earlier thread on openssl-dev explains that OpenSSL chooses to cast
> the
On Wed, 2007-05-23 at 03:07 +0200, Dr. Stephen Henson wrote:
> On Tue, May 22, 2007, Peter Hartley wrote:
> > So how about using expressions of the form
> > (void*)(1 ? x : ((T*)NULL))
> > instead?
>
> Would the compiler (or possibly other compilers) give out a warning that a
> test was al
On Tue, May 22, 2007, Peter Hartley wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> Having just downloaded GCC 4.2.0 and discovered that it can't build
> OpenSSL (not even in the snapshots AFAICT), I'd like to offer a possible
> solution.
>
> The earlier thread on openssl-dev explains that OpenSSL chooses to cast
> the
Hi there,
Having just downloaded GCC 4.2.0 and discovered that it can't build
OpenSSL (not even in the snapshots AFAICT), I'd like to offer a possible
solution.
The earlier thread on openssl-dev explains that OpenSSL chooses to cast
the function pointers, not the parameters, to achieve type-safet
