Subject: Signs of the Apocalypse

From: Steve Robbins <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 10:39:10 -0500 (EST)

Hi,

If any of you are considering code hacking this weekend, can I implore you
to watch the signs, please!

Prodded by Mark Manning, I have been running test builds on SGI systems
(5.3 and 6.5) with gcc and with the vendor compilers.

There are *lots* of warnings generated.

One of the biggest classes of warnings are signed/unsigned issues.

(1) signed chars - there are lots of places in the code that use "char"
and "unsigned char" interchangeably.  Bad, bad, bad!  If you find yourself
coding a routine that involves Uchar parameters or return type, take a
minute to think whether it really needs to be unsigned or not.

(2) unsigned int * - lots of the X calls (XGetGeometry, for example) use
	**unsigned** int pointers to return height & width values.  However, lots
of places in the code blithely pass regular ints.  I know, I know, this is
horribly pedantic of me, but I like to see things compile without
warnings.  Can we be a bit more careful of parameter types, please?

--
Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.hpc.uh.edu/fvwm/>.
To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the
body of a message to [email-masked].
To report problems, send mail to [email-masked].

---

From: Chris Rankin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 18:54:44 -0500 (EST)

Steve Robbins wrote:
>        **unsigned** int pointers to return height & width values.

OK, so you noticed - sorry to rehash what you just said. This is the
peril of reading your mailbox in reverse chronological order.

Chris.