Re: [PATCH 0/3] Fix SunCC compiler complaints new in v2.35.0-rc0

From: René Scharfe <l.s.r@web.de>
Date: Jan 11, 2022, 18:36 UTC
Message-ID: <c3228d53-5997-d86c-87a5-5861dacde518@web.de>
In-Reply-To: <CAFQ2z_M1skVCFYQ-kM5dMVXcUxV-uR+Zf89dKxgc2v1c1tre=A@mail.gmail.com>

Am 11.01.22 um 18:06 schrieb Han-Wen Nienhuys:

Show 15 quoted lines

> On Tue, Jan 11, 2022 at 5:40 PM Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
> <avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> This trivial set of patches fixes compiler complaints from SunCC on
>> Solaris that are new in v2.35.0-rc0.
>
> Thanks, looks fine in principle.
>
> For the switch, maybe the block types should be an enum. Is there
> tooling that would detect a missing case in that case, so we could
> drop the abort() ?
>
> For the 0xffffffff constant, there is probably a better symbolic
> constant somewhere. Or could we say (1<<64) -1 without causing
> overflow?

How about -1?

Or you could initialize min and max to the actual value of the first item instead of to the absolute limits of the data type.

René