Re: [PATCH] s390 (7/13): gcc 3.3 adaptions.

[Andreas Schwab]

Jörn Engel <[e-mail]> writes:

|> On Mon, 24 February 2003 23:07:25 +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
|> > 
|> > Jeff Garzik <[e-mail]> writes:
|> > 
|> > |> On Mon, Feb 24, 2003 at 10:35:24PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
|> > |> > Linus Torvalds <[e-mail]> writes:
|> > |> > 
|> > |> > |> Does gcc still warn about things like
|> > |> > |> 
|> > |> > |> 	#define COUNT (sizeof(array)/sizeof(element))
|> > |> > |> 
|> > |> > |> 	int i;
|> > |> > |> 	for (i = 0; i < COUNT; i++)
|> > |> > |> 		...
|> > |> > |> 
|> > |> > |> where COUNT is obviously unsigned (because sizeof is size_t and thus 
|> > |> > |> unsigned)?
|> > |> > |> 
|> > |> > |> Gcc used to complain about things like that, which is a FUCKING DISASTER. 
|> > |> > 
|> > |> > How can you distinguish that from other occurrences of (int)<(size_t)?
|> > |> 
|> > |> The bounds are obviously constant and unsigned at compile time.
|> > 
|> > But that's not the point.  It's the runtime value of i that gets converted
|> > (to unsigned), not the compile time value of COUNT.  Thus if i ever gets
|> > negative you have a problem.
|> 
|> COUNT is constant and COUNT < INT_MAX. gcc can cast the constant bound
|> to the variable's type to fix this problem.

This is not how C works.

Andreas.

-- 
Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, [e-mail]
SuSE Linux AG, Deutschherrnstr. 15-19, D-90429 Nürnberg
Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756  01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5
"And now for something completely different."