Prevent warning due to type-limits on arrsetlen(arr, 0)
#1732
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
As suggested by @nothings, cast array capacity and new capacity to `ptrdiff_t` in order to avoid 'always-false´ complaints that arise from `-Wextra`.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Related to #1731.
As suggested by @nothings, cast array capacity and new capacity to
ptrdiff_tin order to avoid 'always-false´ complaints that arise from-Wextra.Why?
I tend to work on projects with pretty restrictive flags (-Wall -Wextra etc.), and I've introduced a dependency on
stb_ds, as it is an excellent library that I use a lot. Unfortunately,arrsetlen(arr, 0)+-Wextraalways produces an extraneous warning because the array capacity is unsigned, and thus the array-growth part of setlen isalways-false.Since the workaround is pretty trivial, I don't think it is a problem to satisfy stricter compilation options in this case.
Why not?
Theoretically this runs the risk of being a bad cast, since PTRDIFF_MAX < SIZE_MAX. Is there a realistic case where this would be a problem? I'm mostly referring to funky platforms I may not be aware of.
Thanks a lot, folks, it's a great library.