Re: warnings originating in gl2ps -- update

[CdeMills]

John W. Eaton wrote:
> 
> 'm not sure what to do about the comparison
> for signed and unsigned integer expressions.  Most of those have to do
> with Octave using a signed integer for its indexing type for
> compatibility with Fortran code that we call, while C/C++ uses the
> unsigned size_t type. 
> 

It's not evident. I worked on removing such problems in a program of mine,
there is no standard way. There should be a "safe cast" between signed and
unsigned, verifying that there is no overwrap possible, like f.i. a great
unsigned becoming a negative signed. I don't have 'off the shelves', simple
solution. The other way is to use assert, but what to do in case of failures
? 

Regards
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/warnings-originating-in-gl2ps-update-tp3298345p3298959.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.