> -----Original Message----- > From: maria-developers- > [email protected] [mailto:maria- > [email protected]] On > Behalf Of Michael Widenius > Sent: Freitag, 4. November 2011 12:11 > To: Jakob Lorberblatt > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Maria-developers] Bug in ENUM options handling? > > > Hi! > > >>>>> "Jakob" == Jakob Lorberblatt <[email protected]> writes: > > Jakob> I believe the the debate ongoing below can be laid to rest at *MOST* > Jakob> platforms size_t will work correctly, I have found few exceptions, > such as > Jakob> GCC prior to 2.4 size_t is defined as a signed integer, in sys/types.h to > Jakob> match the definitions located in this file for other nix related > Jakob> platforms, and stddef.h just includes this definition; this is a very old > Jakob> version of GCC and I believe (correct me if I am wrong) it would not > Jakob> compile MariaDB's source code anyway, not positive though haven't > tried > Jakob> it. > > I have compiled and used MySQL with very old versions of gcc and with > systems where size_t is signed. I don't think it would be hard to get > the current code to work on these systems.
There is no urgent need to port MariaDB or MySQL to very old gcc. > The issue I have mainly with size_t for enum is that in some people's > mind it's not guaranteed to be unsigned and because of that it's not a > perfect choice. For enum, signed or not should not be a big deal. As I see it, even signed char with would suffice. > Personally I prefer to use 'uint, ulong, ulonglong' or even > uint32 and uint32 instead of size_t for some objects. I understand. As long as everyone is using GCC with default setting, which does not warn about implicit conversion, one cannot see which of implicit conversions resulting in 12872 warnings here http://buildbot.askmonty.org/buildbot/builders/win2008r2-vs2010-amd64-packag es/builds/248 are noise, and which ones are not. I used to babysit the build looking for new warning after someone else's push, but I stopped doing that and the number of warnings has approximately doubled since. To fix that cleanly, it is not just enough to eliminate ulong. One would also need to enable -Wno-conversion on newer GCC (this at least catches conversions not involving ulong , e.g longlong to int, double to char), and as long as you prefer using smaller than natural types, write code full of casts , or just adopt size_t whenever appropriate. Wlad _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
