On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 06:30:10PM +0000, Gavin Smith wrote: > On Fri, Jan 23, 2026 at 12:11:27AM +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote: > > > I haven't understand fully all the reasons for the changes to types in > > > this code. I expect this problem is a hangover from people deciding to > > > convert from unsigned integer types to signed integer types or vice versa. > > > > > > (In commit 219bed49caf262a (2012-11-17), types were changed from long > > > (signed) > > > to size_t (unsigned). This was further changed in the commit above.) > > > > I can say for the changes I made. The idea was to avoid mixing signed > > and unsigned integers because it can easily lead to bugs because going > > through 0 may get unnoticed, and also probably because it is undefined > > behaviour. When this is anavoidable, at least add something that shows > > that a conversion is needed or such. > > Yes, that sounds like a good idea. Your changes make sense, as far as I can > tell. It's probably good to use signed integer types in more places, where > possible. It's just led to a compiler warning in this case but there is > likely no real problem that wasn't there before. >
FWIW there was also the same warning from code in info/makedoc.c which hasn't been touched since 2002 or earlier.
