On Wednesday 07 January 2009 13:33, Peter Kjellerstedt wrote: > This has (almost) been tried before. Then it was -fsigned-char, > but I think this thread from 2007 still bears meaning (especially > Mike's mail): > > http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/uclibc/2007-April/038622.html
this one: > > that enabled -fsigned-char for all arches. What was the reasoning > > behind this decision? I'm reliably informed that it generates > > suboptimal code on our architecture. > > what dumbass committed that change ! But -funsigned-char is much more safe than signed one. Point me to a bug (in any program not just uclibc) which happens with unsigned chars but works with signed ones. -- vda _______________________________________________ uClibc mailing list uClibc@uclibc.org http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/uclibc
