On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Mouse wrote:
[...] gcc errors due to comparison of signed and unsigned values.
It is best to fix the errors.
What errors?
It is not necessarily an error to compare signed and unsigned values.
In my experience, that warning produces so many more false positives
than
In article 201108230521.baa12...@sparkle.rodents-montreal.org,
Mouse mo...@rodents-montreal.org wrote:
[...] gcc errors due to comparison of signed and unsigned values.
It is best to fix the errors.
What errors?
It is not necessarily an error to compare signed and unsigned values.
In my
[...] gcc errors due to comparison of signed and unsigned values.
It is best to fix the errors.
In my experience, that warning produces so many more false positives
than useful warnings that I normally shut it off entirely.
and that one time that using it might have warned you about a serious
It is not necessarily an error to compare signed and unsigned
values. [...]
And it is not an error to put assignments in conditionals, or not
place parentheses to clarify operator precedence, etc. It is a
warning [...]. For some of us this is helpful. The compiler writers
try to help
On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 03:11:27AM -0400, Mouse wrote:
[...] gcc errors due to comparison of signed and unsigned values.
It is best to fix the errors.
In my experience, that warning produces so many more false positives
than useful warnings that I normally shut it off entirely.
and
On Tue, 23 Aug 2011, Christos Zoulas wrote:
I'm trying to modularize a couple of drivers, and one of them is
generating some gcc errors due to comparison of signed and unsigned
values.
The driver module is currently being compiled with WARNS=4 (just picked
that up from another Makefile). Is
I'm trying to modularize a couple of drivers, and one of them is
generating some gcc errors due to comparison of signed and unsigned
values.
The driver module is currently being compiled with WARNS=4 (just picked
that up from another Makefile). Is there a more appropriate WARNS=n to
use to
In article pine.neb.4.64.1108222146340.22...@screamer.whooppee.com,
Paul Goyette p...@whooppee.com wrote:
I'm trying to modularize a couple of drivers, and one of them is
generating some gcc errors due to comparison of signed and unsigned
values.
The driver module is currently being compiled
[...] gcc errors due to comparison of signed and unsigned values.
It is best to fix the errors.
What errors?
It is not necessarily an error to compare signed and unsigned values.
In my experience, that warning produces so many more false positives
than useful warnings that I normally shut it
