# [PATCH 1/2] Use ULONG_MAX rather than implicit cast of -1. 2 messages from 2006-11-05 to 2006-11-05. Participants: Shawn O. Pearce, Shawn Pearce. Thread: https://gitlist.dev/t/43507 ## Shawn Pearce, 2006-11-05 07:18 Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Apply obvious numerical cast for stupid C compilers. Message-ID: <20061105071805.GA4506@spearce.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20061105071805.GA4506%40spearce.org In-Reply-To: <7v3b8ywewj.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> ``` Junio C Hamano wrote: > "Shawn O. Pearce" writes: > > > At least one (older) version of the Solaris C compiler won't allow > > 'unsigned long x = -1' without explicitly casting -1 to a type of > > unsigned long. As annoying as it may be to explicitly perform the > > cast the compiler is right; -1 is not an unsigned value. > > Is the compiler really _right_? The usual integral promotion > rules should apply if it claims to be a C compiler, I would > think. I'm rusty on my C; but I would expect an error if I tried to assign a clearly negative value into an unsigned value, especially in a case like this. It could be compiler is wrong, but as a programmer I'd want to know I wrote something stupid like that, because maybe the variable should have been signed. :-) > But I think the code actually wants ULONG_MAX there. Is that > symbolic constant available at the point of offending > initialization with the header files we already include, I > wonder. Yes, I agree. I almost changed it to ULONG_MAX but didn't since the original author felt -1 was the better choice here. *shrug* For what its worth ULONG_MAX works on my Mac OS X system. Tomorrow when I have access to that "broken" platform again I'll try ULONG_MAX and see if it compiles there. -- ``` ## Shawn O. Pearce, 2006-11-05 07:27 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Use ULONG_MAX rather than implicit cast of -1. Message-ID: <20061105072707.GA4579@spearce.org> URL: https://gitlist.dev/e/20061105072707.GA4579%40spearce.org In-Reply-To: <20061105071805.GA4506@spearce.org> ``` At least one (older) version of the Solaris C compiler won't allow 'unsigned long x = -1' without explicitly casting -1 to a type of unsigned long. So instead use ULONG_MAX, which is really the correct constant anyway. Signed-off-by: Shawn O. Pearce --- This is a resend of my earlier patch in in this same thread... builtin-apply.c | 2 +- 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) diff --git a/builtin-apply.c b/builtin-apply.c index db7cdce..aad5526 100644 --- a/builtin-apply.c +++ b/builtin-apply.c @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ static int apply_verbosely; static int no_add; static int show_index_info; static int line_termination = '\n'; -static unsigned long p_context = -1; +static unsigned long p_context = ULONG_MAX; static const char apply_usage[] = "git-apply [--stat] [--numstat] [--summary] [--check] [--index] [--cached] [--apply] [--no-add] [--index-info] [--allow-binary-replacement] [--reverse] [--reject] [--verbose] [-z] [-pNUM] [-CNUM] [--whitespace=] ..."; -- 1.4.3.3.g9621 ```