Re: [sqlite] SQLite as a Windows kernel tool

[Dirk Zabel]

[EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb:


Ken & Deb Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
 


vdbeapi.c
e:\SQLITE\327\Source\vdbeapi.c(55) : warning C4244: 'return' :  
conversion from 'i64' to 'int', possible loss of data
e:\SQLITE\327\Source\vdbeapi.c(195) : warning C4244: '=' : conversion  
from 'double' to 'i64', possible loss of data
e:\SQLITE\327\Source\vdbeapi.c(232) : warning C4244: '=' : conversion  
from 'double' to 'u64', possible loss of data


   



What about these three warnings do you think is a concern?
Have you actually looked at the code in question to see
if the possibility of data loss is real and unintentional?
What makes you think that these warnings are not just a case
of the compiler blowing smoke?

--
D. Richard Hipp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


 


These concerns seem to me not unfounded.
Just looking at the three cited positions in vdbeapi.c, i find:
Line 55: the conversion i64->int might be ok, depends on the 
runtime-argument pVal. I am not sure.
Line 195:  this  conversion  double->i64  is done by intent; giving the 
number of nanoseconds since midnight. I think a
cast to int64 would be appropriate to express this intent. I comment 
might help to see the reason, but on the other hand the code looks quite 
obvious here.
Line 232: same conversion, insofar applies the same remark. But what if 
between the computation of startTime and rNow midnight occurred? I guess 
there would be a wrap-around - an error in my point of view.


I don't think it's a good idea to assume a compiler warning about type 
conversions are "blowing smoke". At least, they should be eliminated in 
order not to cover messages about real quirks.


Regards
 Dirk

Re: [sqlite] Please test on Win95/98/ME

[Dirk Zabel]

Ralf Junker schrieb:


I don't like using the MSLU because its a dependency that up until now SQLite 
has not had.  Since the unicows.dll is not part of a standard Windows 
installation, it would require developers to redistribute that DLL in addition 
to the sqlite DLL.
   



I very much agree with Robert for the reasons he has given. The beauty of 
SQLite is that it is simple and small. Linking to a non OS dependencies would 
take that beauty away.

The approach of the latest os_win.c is absolutely correct and a standard 
procedure for all cross-Windows applications with Unicode support, even 
Microsoft's. It just needs a few improvements to get it working reliably on 
Win95. The Win95 Unicode deficiencies are part of that system and there is 
nothing SQLite can do about it.

Please keep SQLite simple and small and do not add additional dependencies!

Regards,

Ralf 



 

I strongly support this request. Really: the strength and beauty of 
sqlite is that I can produce a standalone binary which does not require 
any system-dependent installation, just copy! PLEASE don't give this away!

Regards
 Dirk