Bruno Haible <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Simon Josefsson wrote:
>> The sys_socket module generates this warning:
>>
>> ../lgl/sys/socket.h: In function 'rpl_fd_isset':
>> ../lgl/sys/socket.h:158: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned
>> ../lgl/sys/socket.h:159: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned
>>
>> I pushed the patch below.
>>
>> However, is the code really appropriate? I'm thinking of this comment:
>>
>> /* Re-define FD_ISSET to avoid a WSA call while we are not using
>> network sockets. */
>
> This comments means IMO that when someone is using select() on pipes and
> console handles, he should not make ws2_32 calls.
Ah, I see.
>> static inline int
>> -rpl_fd_isset (int fd, fd_set * set)
>> +rpl_fd_isset (SOCKET fd, fd_set * set)
>> {
>> - int i;
>> + u_int i;
>> if (set == NULL)
>> return 0;
>
> I agree with the signature change, because this FD_ISSET replacement is
> called by winsock-select.c. For the type of 'i', better use a portable type,
> such as 'unsigned int'. 'u_int' is not a portable type - it may be present in
> mingw and absent in MSVC's headers, who knows. Proposed patch below.
Actually, u_int is the official Windows API type for the struct member,
see:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms737873.aspx
I can't seem to find documentation for u_int, so I'm not sure if it is
guaranteed to be the same as 'unsigned int'.
/Simon
> Bruno
>
>
> --- lib/sys_socket.in.h.orig 2008-10-23 03:08:52.000000000 +0200
> +++ lib/sys_socket.in.h 2008-10-23 03:08:42.000000000 +0200
> @@ -122,7 +122,8 @@
> static inline int
> rpl_fd_isset (SOCKET fd, fd_set * set)
> {
> - u_int i;
> + unsigned int i;
> +
> if (set == NULL)
> return 0;
>
