On Mon, 2009-10-05 at 15:35 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote: > On Sun, 2009-10-04 at 12:08 +1100, Daniel Stone wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 02, 2009 at 01:42:50PM -0700, Jamey Sharp wrote: > > > On 64-bit systems, int and pointers don't have the same size, so GCC gives > > > warnings about casts between int and pointer types. However, in the cases > > > covered by this patch, it's always a value that fits in int being stored > > > temporarily as a pointer and then converted back later, which is safe. > > > Casting through the pointer-sized integer type intptr_t convinces the > > > compiler that this is OK. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Jamey Sharp <ja...@minilop.net> > > > > Alan, Matthieu -- is this portable enough? > > intptr_t is part of stdint.h in C99, but seems to also be in unistd.h in > UNIX98, which is nearly universal by this point unlike C99. > > I would love love love to see us move entirely to stdint types instead > of the mess we've got now.
Yes. Yes yes yes. -- Eric Anholt e...@anholt.net eric.anh...@intel.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel mailing list xorg-devel@lists.x.org http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
