On 27.01.2021 09:31, Jan Beulich wrote: > But yes, I'm not the maintainer of this code, so if you're > happy with such risks, so be it.
And actually I was only partly right here - there's one hunk here affecting code I'm the maintainer just as much as you are. At least there I'd like to ask that ... > For the record, to me the less risky approach here would seem > to have been to make use of compilers allowing to choose > whether plain char is signed or unsigned, and force it to > unsigned for at least the affected components. ... this be considered as an alternative, before I maybe withdraw my de-facto nak. (To amend my earlier reply: Such a command line option addition could then also be properly commented, to explain the particular need for the option.) Jan
