On Tue, 24 Sep 2013, Daniel Stenberg wrote: > > Should we be using curlx_uztosi() instead of curlx_sztosi() as per my > > proposed and attached fix? > > Yes I think so. I think the current code is just an honest mistake. Go > ahead and push I say!
Pushed this morning... Cheers. So that brings me to what I think is the last warning (hopefully)... tool_urlglob.c on line 293: The variables being passed into the multiply() function are A) an unsigned long pointer and B) an unsigned long respectively, however, the function is declared with the second parameter as a (signed) long :( I think this should be also an unsigned long - especially when you consider that the first parameter is an in / out parameter so can only return an unsigned long as the result - If a negative second parameter was input then the output would be negative as well. However, fixing that up potentially causes a warning on the "other" usage of multiply() on line 114 as its second parameter "size" is declared as an int - as per the "content" union in "URLPattern". This variable appears to be unsigned in usage although is compared against "ptr_s" which is also declared as an int but,, again, appears to be unsigned in usage. After all of that... I guess I have two questions: 1) Should I fix them up? 2) Is unsigned long the best choice for all of these? Should they be unsigned long, unsigned int or size_t? Oh.... I guess that ended up being three questions ;-) Cheers Steve ------------------------------------------------------------------- List admin: http://cool.haxx.se/list/listinfo/curl-library Etiquette: http://curl.haxx.se/mail/etiquette.html
