On Sun, Sep 30, 2001 at 11:05:52PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > 2001-09-30 Albert Chin-A-Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > * ltdl.c: change some types to size_t from int because > strlen() returns size_t. argz_len changed to size_t in > foreach_dirinpath() because argzize_path() takes 3rd > argument as size_t, not int. Based on lint run from > Bob Friesenhahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>. > > On Sun, Sep 30, 2001 at 11:04:35AM -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote: > > Here is the output from Sun's 64-bit lint tool when run on libltdl > > current as of September 29. You will notice that there are a number of > > type down-conversions going on when the code is 64-bit. In order to > > be safe, these types should jive for both the ILP32 and LP64 data type > > models. > > > > (390) warning: suspicious comparison of unsigned with 0: op "<=" > > static lt_ptr > realloc (ptr, size) > lt_ptr ptr; > size_t size; > { > if (size <= 0) > > Is size_t always unsigned?
Yup. This must be a result of careless code tweaking on my part. I've made this into `==' in addition to the changes in your patch. I wonder, should we also test for a system definition of size_t at configure time? And presumably substitute for `unsigned long' if the system definition is missing? > > (1994) warning: cast from 64-bit integer to 32-bit integer > > sprintf (filename, "%.*s/%s", (int) dirname_len, dirname, dlname); > > According to sprintf(3) on a Linux box, when using %*, the field width > must be of type int. Agreed. > > (2643) warning: comparing 32-bit integer with 64-bit integer > > for (i = 0; i < ext - base_name; ++i) > > ext and base_name are char *. Should we make i a size_t? Seems like the right thing to do from here. I'm also adding this change to your patch. > > (2718) warning: passing 64-bit integer arg, expecting 32-bit integer: fgets(arg 2) > > if (!fgets (line, line_len, file)) > > line_len is size_t. fgets expects second argument to be int. Hmmm. That sucks. I'll cast it down to an int for now. But if someone has the time to implement an rpl_fgets in the spirit of the other replacement functions near the top of ltdl.c, I'd be very grateful... Appying to HEAD and branch-1-4. Cheers, Gary. -- ())_. Gary V. Vaughan gary@(oranda.demon.co.uk|gnu.org) ( '/ Research Scientist http://www.oranda.demon.co.uk ,_())____ / )= GNU Hacker http://www.gnu.org/software/libtool \' `& `(_~)_ Tech' Author http://sources.redhat.com/autobook =`---d__/ _______________________________________________ Libtool mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool