On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Ben Reser <b...@reser.org> wrote: > On 1/13/15 11:44 AM, Ben Reser wrote: > > On 1/13/15 11:34 AM, Ben Reser wrote: > >> On 1/13/15 11:13 AM, Branko Čibej wrote: > >>> Since it is a test, what's wrong with just casting the first vararg to > >>> (apr_uint64_t) instead, since we "know" (i.e., hope) that off_t won't > >>> overflow 64 bits ... > >> > >> If you cast it to apr_uint64_t it can read into memory it shouldn't be > (i.e. > >> the test may crash on platforms without 64-bit off_t). Maybe we don't > care > >> about those platforms, but I'm not aware of us requiring LFS/64-bit > off_t. > > > > I should be clearer here. It can read into memory it shouldn't > already. The > > cast just makes the warning go away and hides the problem. > > Nevermind I was thinking in terms of passing pointers and this is passing > by > value not reference so Branko is right you can just cast the value. > Committed > in r1651469. > > Thanks for fixing this, Ben! Casting to uint64 is the right thing to do.
-- Stefan^2.
