On Tue, 2009-07-21 at 23:34 +0200, Javier Martín wrote: > > If int and int32_t are different types, gcc will warn about it, at least > > for implicit conversion with data loss. > Oh, yes... with the current build system and without -Werror, warnings > are _very_ visible. </sarcasm>
I just use make >/dev/null > Besides, do we really have -Wconversion > enabled? No. Have you actually tried it? It finds some interesting stuff. For instance, the return value of grub_file_seek(). We can clean whatever -Wconversion finds. That may find some real bugs and it will prepare us to supporting new architectures. > I don't know, but gcc tends to be quite silent when it comes to > type conversion, mainly due to the laxitude it's used in *nix C > programs. The cast in that code was all but implicit, and explicit casts > tend to shut the compiler up. However, we are not adding support for architectures with non-32-bit int type right now. Things may improve by the time we start that effort. New format specifiers can appear to deal with 32-bit numbers. > > It's more likely that bugs will be introduced by that change, not fixed. > > Besides, the code will be harder to read. > You say it'd be harder to read because the macros are newly-introduced > (C99) and thus not widely know. However, they are pretty clear and > self-explanatory once you google them the first time... and at the very > least they call attention to themselves: an unknowing programmer would > wonder what they are. Using a "normal" print specifier and a type cast > does not. OK, if you can do it if you want. It would be great if you fix some real bugs in process. -- Regards, Pavel Roskin _______________________________________________ Grub-devel mailing list Grub-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/grub-devel
