On 12/11/2014 09:18 AM, ROMANO MASPERO wrote: > The problem is, on my compiler, if I do something like: > > bool is_found = ISFOUND (cursor); > > the compiler downgrades cursor->found_count to a bool type (8 bit), so if > cursor->found_count is a multiple of 256 then ISFOUND returns 0.
That is NOT compliant behavior for a C99 compiler (all non-zero values must be collapsed to 1, regardless of original size), but IS the behavior to expect when using gnulib's <stdbool.h> replacement on a C89 compiler (where there is no native bool support, and where gnulib documents that such assignments are unsafe). Since we don't require a C99 compiler in tar, this is a bug in our source code, and we should instead write: bool is_found = !!ISFOUND (cursor); or some similar construct that guarantees a C89-compliant force-to-1 semantics that we need; or fix the ISFOUND() macro to guarantee bool output to begin with. -- Eric Blake eblake redhat com +1-919-301-3266 Libvirt virtualization library http://libvirt.org
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
