apr-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Orton <jor...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: Windows 2003 IA64 builds?
Date Thu, 19 Aug 2004 12:18:04 GMT
On Tue, Aug 17, 2004 at 06:29:34PM -0400, Allan Edwards wrote:
> I'm wondering why gcc doesn't do the same since
> int=4 ptr=8 bytes for both platforms, is gcc just not
> as strict? And how to proceed, do we start fixing
> these warnings for Win64 even though they may not
> represent real life concerns in order to achieve a
> warning free /W3 compile for Win 64?

w.r.t. common code, depends what the changes are; if there are places
where an int is used to store the difference between pointers, it's
probably a good and safe change to make that an apr_ssize_t instead.

w.r.t. warnings: yes, gcc is just less picky.  But Win64 has a 32-bit
long, right?  So there is a significant difference between Win64 and
64-bit Unix platforms which are all (AFAIK) LP64.

> -                rv = collapse_iovec((char**) &ptfb->Tail, 
> &ptfb->TailLength,
> +                rv = collapse_iovec((char**) &ptfb->Tail, (apr_size_t 
> *)&ptfb->TailLength,

if that's casting (int *) to (size_t *) that looks dangerous.

joe

Mime
View raw message