On 1/13/15 11:34 AM, Ben Reser wrote: > On 1/13/15 11:13 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: >> Since it is a test, what's wrong with just casting the first vararg to >> (apr_uint64_t) instead, since we "know" (i.e., hope) that off_t won't >> overflow 64 bits ... > > If you cast it to apr_uint64_t it can read into memory it shouldn't be (i.e. > the test may crash on platforms without 64-bit off_t). Maybe we don't care > about those platforms, but I'm not aware of us requiring LFS/64-bit off_t.
I should be clearer here. It can read into memory it shouldn't already. The cast just makes the warning go away and hides the problem.
