[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- Subject: Re: Heap usage and variable argument C functions
- From: David Given <dg@...>
- Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 13:33:17 +0000
On Tuesday 21 December 2004 12:25, Brett Bibby wrote:
> I didn't say it was illegal, that's why it's a warning and not an error.
I'm sorry, I misspoke: I didn't mean legal, I meant *expected*. It would not
occur to me that putting a long into an int would produce an warning because
that would not strike me as being worthy of a warning except in special
circumstances (such as the compilers people are mentioning).
*shrug* I'm rather coddled; most of the platforms I've been dealing with are
gcc-based, which means I get very used to a certain type of behaviour. (I
remember once trying to compile a port of Nucleus with gcc instead of the
proprietry compiler that it had been written with, and discovering that none
of the device drivers worked: the proprietry compiler treated all variables
as volatile, which gcc didn't, and the original author hadn't bothered to
mark any of the hardware registers as volatile, so of course gcc was
optimising out all the delay loops.)
But it does seem to me that you have to write all code with a set of
assumptions in mind, and Lua's assumptions are that it's going to run on a
standard C system. If your system has different assumptions or requirements,
then I think it's reasonable that you should be expected to make
modifications. So I don't think it's fair to raise that issue as an actual
That said, if you were to submit a patch, I'm sure the maintainers would be
interested in considering it as a useful new *feature* (i.e. compiles cleanly
on systems with non-standard behaviours X, Y and Z).
+- David Given --McQ-+ "A psychic? That sounds like science fiction."
| email@example.com | "Dear, you live on a spaceship."
| (firstname.lastname@example.org) | "So?"
+- www.cowlark.com --+ --- Firefly, _Objects in Space_