Re: assignment type mismatch complaints

On Sat, 2002-10-26 at 18:34, Larry Rosenman wrote:
> On Sat, 2002-10-26 at 18:27, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Larry Rosenman <ler(at)lerctr(dot)org> writes:
> > > How concerned are we about assignment type mismatch warnings?
> >
> > They're probably all "char versus unsigned char" complaints?
> Probably. The first few I looked at are PG_GETARG_CSTRING to unsigned
> char assignments. (I can send the whole list to either you, Tom, or the
> list).
>
> >
> > There are a ton of them on compilers that care about it; most of
> > 'em in the multibyte support. While it would be nice to clean up
> > all that someday, I can't say that I think it's a really profitable
> > use of time.
> Ok, I understand that. It seems that there are a bunch, but they are
> just warnings.
> >
> > One difficulty is that the obvious fix (add a bunch of casts) is
> > probably a net degradation of the code. Explicit casts will hide
> > mismatches that are a lot worse than char signedness, and so
> > cluttering the code with them makes things more fragile IMHO.
> > I think an acceptable fix would involve running around and changing
> > datatype and function declarations; which is much more subtle and
> > thought-requiring than throwing in a cast wherever the compiler
> > burps.
> Understand, and I don't expect it to happen in a beta test :-).
If anyone wants to look at these:

ftp://ftp.lerctr.org/pub/pg-dev/gmake.out.txt

Thanks,
LER
>
>
> >
> > regards, tom lane
> --
> Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
> Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler(at)lerctr(dot)org
> US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
>
--
Larry Rosenman http://www.lerctr.org/~ler
Phone: +1 972-414-9812 E-Mail: ler(at)lerctr(dot)org
US Mail: 1905 Steamboat Springs Drive, Garland, TX 75044-6749