Well, I'm not going to accept any solution that leaves warnings on my
system. ifdef it with have_ms_windows if you wish.
Olivier Galibert wrote:
On Wed, Mar 15, 2000 at 03:19:55AM -0700, Ben Wing wrote:
> Oh puhleeeze Olivier, don't give me that anti-MS shit.
That wasn't anti-MS. That was anti-cast. I had to track down too
many breakages due to unnecessary casts (especially on 64bits
architectures) to accept adding junk ones to silence buggy warnings.
Even gcc warnings, mind you. I'd rather spend time fixing gcc.
The only ones I accept (with clenched teeth however) are the
casts-from-void* necessary to make the C++ compilers happy, and that's
because they otherwise spew out errors.
> That cast in memcpy cannot possibly introduce a bug.
What do you think I meant by that:
> > For instance, the day the lrecord_implementations_table becomes a
> > const table.
We may decide someday to change the table into a constant one (after
all it is a table of pointers to constant structures with constant
indexes). If someone forgets about the memcpy, it may or may not
segfault, depending of the phase of the moon.
OG.
--
Ben
In order to save my hands, I am cutting back on my mail. I also write
as succinctly as possible -- please don't be offended. If you send me
mail, you _will_ get a response, but please be patient, especially for
XEmacs-related mail. If you need an immediate response and it is not
apparent in your message, please say so. Thanks for your understanding.
See also
http://www.666.com/ben/typing.html.