Hi Neels, On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 08:18:52AM +0200, Neels Hofmeyr wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2021 at 02:45:42AM +0000, [email protected] wrote: > > >>> CID 240103: (CONSTANT_EXPRESSION_RESULT) > > >>> "val < -9223372036854775808LL /* -9223372036854775807L - 1 */" is > > >>> always false regardless of the values of its operands. This occurs as > > >>> the logical operand of "if". > > 1434 if (val < INT64_MIN) { > > 1435 if (result) > > 1436 *result = INT64_MIN; > > 1437 return -ERANGE; > > 1438 } > > Yes I know, but is it guaranteed on all archs in past and future that long > long int is 64 bit?
it seems anything except IBM 370, PDP-11 etc. from that area (which has no long long) has long long int as 64bit in the future who knows, maybe it gets even longer, who knows. > I'd just ignore these warnings if that's ok with everyone else. Wouldn't they go away with a simple change from INT64_MIN/MAX to LLONG_MIN/MAX? -- - Harald Welte <[email protected]> http://laforge.gnumonks.org/ ============================================================================ "Privacy in residential applications is a desirable marketing option." (ETSI EN 300 175-7 Ch. A6)
