On 03.09.2014, at 02:16, Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 5:10 PM, wm4 wrote:
>
>>> In the end, if we do decide to enable this warning, we will have to
>> insert
>>> some casts that are clearly safe, e.g.
>>>
>>> if (x > INT_MAX)
>>>return;
>>> int y = (int)x;
>>>
>>> Indeed
On Tue, 2 Sep 2014 16:57:02 -0700
Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 4:46 PM, wm4 wrote:
>
> > > I tried not to "just plaster things with casts", but as I said, I was
> > > counting on review feedback to help me understand where changes would be
> > > fixing real problems or hiding r
On Tue, 2 Sep 2014 16:34:58 -0700
Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 2, 2014 at 3:19 PM, wm4 wrote:
>
> > Here's why patches like these are bad: they're
> > HUGE. Reviewing them takes a lot of time, and the result is
> > questionable. How are we going to do v2 of this patch? And v3 etc.?
> > Pr
On Tue, 2 Sep 2014 23:43:33 +0200
Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 01:13:27PM -0700, Peter Kasting wrote:
> > On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 2:21 AM, wm4 wrote:
> > > I'd
> > > expect it rather to hide bugs than to expose them. For example, it
> > > could make a static analyzer with va
On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 15:44:34 -0700
Peter Kasting wrote:
> From 1c94e78d2b2037d492ea5abb3edb7960c8e98a1d Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Peter Kasting
> Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 15:31:41 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH] Fix MSVC warnings about possible value truncation.
Tried to review it. Here's why pat
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 01:13:27PM -0700, Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 2:21 AM, wm4 wrote:
> > I'd
> > expect it rather to hide bugs than to expose them. For example, it
> > could make a static analyzer with value range analysis stop working,
> > because the casts will basically
On Fri, 29 Aug 2014 15:52:25 -0700
Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
>
> > Peter Kasting google.com> writes:
> >
> > > The attached patch fixes instances of MSVC warning
> > > C4244 about possible value truncation (e.g. when
> > > assigning double
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 7:25 PM, Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 04:38:28PM -0700, Peter Kasting wrote:
> > I think that reinforces why a change like this is important. These sorts
> > of value truncations shouldn't just be invisibly, implicitly happening,
> > since in many
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 04:38:28PM -0700, Peter Kasting wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Reimar Döffinger
> wrote:
>
> > First, this needs very, very careful review. I am not at all convinced
> > that these will not change behaviour.
> >
>
> I strongly agree that it needs careful review
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 4:26 PM, Reimar Döffinger
wrote:
> First, this needs very, very careful review. I am not at all convinced
> that these will not change behaviour.
>
I strongly agree that it needs careful review.
I think that reinforces why a change like this is important. These sorts
of
On 29/08/14 8:26 PM, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> On 30.08.2014, at 00:44, Peter Kasting wrote:
>> Hi FFMPEG devs, please forgive any errors here as I'm normally a Chromium
>> developer and this is my first submission to FFMPEG.
>>
>> The attached patch fixes instances of MSVC warning C4244 about pos
On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 01:26:46AM +0200, Reimar Döffinger wrote:
> On 30.08.2014, at 00:44, Peter Kasting wrote:
> > Hi FFMPEG devs, please forgive any errors here as I'm normally a Chromium
> > developer and this is my first submission to FFMPEG.
> >
> > The attached patch fixes instances of MS
Reimar Döffinger gmx.de> writes:
> Second, I believe powf and sinf are less commonly
> available than pow and sin, so I think this will
> break compilation on some platforms
I fear this is correct.
Carl Eugen
___
ffmpeg-devel mailing list
ffmpeg-de
On 30.08.2014, at 00:44, Peter Kasting wrote:
> Hi FFMPEG devs, please forgive any errors here as I'm normally a Chromium
> developer and this is my first submission to FFMPEG.
>
> The attached patch fixes instances of MSVC warning C4244 about possible
> value truncation (e.g. when assigning doub
On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 3:48 PM, Carl Eugen Hoyos wrote:
> Peter Kasting google.com> writes:
>
> > The attached patch fixes instances of MSVC warning
> > C4244 about possible value truncation (e.g. when
> > assigning double to float or int64_t to int).
> > This warning is currently disabled in C
Peter Kasting google.com> writes:
> The attached patch fixes instances of MSVC warning
> C4244 about possible value truncation (e.g. when
> assigning double to float or int64_t to int).
> This warning is currently disabled in Chromium's
> MSVC build and
> I'm trying to enable it.
Why?
Did yo
16 matches
Mail list logo
