On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 9:17 PM, Ben Reser <ben_at_reser.org> wrote:
> On 1/13/15 11:44 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> > On 1/13/15 11:34 AM, Ben Reser wrote:
> >> On 1/13/15 11:13 AM, Branko Čibej wrote:
> >>> Since it is a test, what's wrong with just casting the first vararg to
> >>> (apr_uint64_t) instead, since we "know" (i.e., hope) that off_t won't
> >>> overflow 64 bits ...
> >> If you cast it to apr_uint64_t it can read into memory it shouldn't be
> >> the test may crash on platforms without 64-bit off_t). Maybe we don't
> >> about those platforms, but I'm not aware of us requiring LFS/64-bit
> > I should be clearer here. It can read into memory it shouldn't
> already. The
> > cast just makes the warning go away and hides the problem.
> Nevermind I was thinking in terms of passing pointers and this is passing
> value not reference so Branko is right you can just cast the value.
> in r1651469.
> Thanks for fixing this, Ben! Casting to uint64 is the right thing to do.
Received on 2015-01-14 01:50:35 CET