Hi,
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 7:55 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Michael Niedermayer
> wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 07:02:42PM -0400, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Ronald S. Bultje
> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > On We
On Thu, Oct 29, 2015 at 12:29 AM, Michael Niedermayer
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 07:02:42PM -0400, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On W
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 07:02:42PM -0400, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Ronald S. Bultje
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 3:05 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Ronald S. Bultje
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> O
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:46 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Ronald S. Bultje
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <
> gajjanaga...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
>
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On W
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >>
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:33 AM, Hendrik Leppkes wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>>> wrote:
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:44 AM, Clément Bœsch wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:34:37AM -0400, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> [...]
>> You could do the same for the last 4 values of the cinething changes, they
>> are clearly not enums, but flags. Flags are always unsigned, so if enums
>> are unsign
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:38 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:34:37AM -0400, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
[...]
> You could do the same for the last 4 values of the cinething changes, they
> are clearly not enums, but flags. Flags are always unsigned, so if enums
> are unsigned and that causes an issue (as it does here), it makes sense t
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 4:00 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
>>> wrote:
>>> > Hi,
>>> >
>>> > On Wed,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:53 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:48 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <
> gajjanaga...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
>
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:34 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> On T
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 8:20 AM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Ronald S. Bultje
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Ronald S. Bultje
> >> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >>
On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 7:00 AM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Ronald S. Bultje
>> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >>
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:58 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Ronald S. Bultje
> wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde <
> gajjanaga...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> ISO C restricts enumerator values to the range of in
On Tue, 27 Oct 2015 20:53:39 -0400
Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> ISO C restricts enumerator values to the range of int. Thus (for instance)
> 0x8000
> unfortunately does not work, and throws a warning with -Wpedantic on
> clang 3.7.
>
> This fixes it by using alternative expressions that resu
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Ronald S. Bultje wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
> wrote:
>>
>> ISO C restricts enumerator values to the range of int. Thus (for instance)
>> 0x8000
>> unfortunately does not work, and throws a warning with -Wpedantic on
>
Hi,
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 8:53 PM, Ganesh Ajjanagadde
wrote:
> ISO C restricts enumerator values to the range of int. Thus (for instance)
> 0x8000
> unfortunately does not work, and throws a warning with -Wpedantic on
> clang 3.7.
>
> This fixes it by using alternative expressions that res
On Tue, Oct 27, 2015 at 08:53:39PM -0400, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote:
> ISO C restricts enumerator values to the range of int. Thus (for instance)
> 0x8000
> unfortunately does not work, and throws a warning with -Wpedantic on
> clang 3.7.
>
> This fixes it by using alternative expressions that
ISO C restricts enumerator values to the range of int. Thus (for instance)
0x8000
unfortunately does not work, and throws a warning with -Wpedantic on
clang 3.7.
This fixes it by using alternative expressions that result in identical
values but do not have this issue.
Tested with FATE.
Sign
24 matches
Mail list logo