On 13 March 2018 at 22:50, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 03/13/2018 09:54 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
>
>> I see you seem to have put a similar pragma for the same warning in
>> anytostr.c.
>>
>
> Yes, and that's the sort of thing I'd rather not do elsewhere. That mess
> started with the thread here:
>
>
On 03/13/2018 09:54 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
I see you seem to have put a similar pragma for the same warning in
anytostr.c.
Yes, and that's the sort of thing I'd rather not do elsewhere. That mess
started with the thread here:
https://lists.gnu.org/r/bug-gnulib/2010-10/msg00428.html
how ab
On 13 March 2018 at 16:40, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 03/13/2018 12:51 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
>
>> Would it be acceptable to add a pragma
>>
>
> I'm not a fan of cluttering the code just to pacify a false alarm. In my
> experience, for Gnulib -Wtautological-compare is more trouble than it's
> wort
On 03/13/2018 12:51 AM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
Would it be acceptable to add a pragma
I'm not a fan of cluttering the code just to pacify a false alarm. In my
experience, for Gnulib -Wtautological-compare is more trouble than it's
worth.
See coreutils for an example of using different -W opti
On 12 March 2018 at 23:55, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 03/09/2018 04:25 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
>
>> According to this Open Group reference page
>> http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/sys/
>> resource.h.html
>> :
>>
>> rlim_t: Unsigned integer type used for limit values.
>>
>
> r
On 03/09/2018 04:25 PM, Reuben Thomas wrote:
According to this Open Group reference page
http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/basedefs/sys/resource.h.html
:
rlim_t: Unsigned integer type used for limit values.
rlim_t is signed on some non-POSIX platforms so the comparison is needed
