Jeff King <peff@xxxxxxxx> writes: > But here's where it gets tricky. In addition to catching any size > mismatches, this will also catch signedness problems. I.e., if we make > OPT_INTEGER() use "intp", then everybody passing in &unsigned_var now > gets a compiler warning. Which maybe is a good thing, I dunno. Hmph, true. I'd agree with back-burnering it for now. Perhaps we'd fix the signedness issue one by one in a preparatory series before converting the value field to a union, if we want to pursue this idea further (in which I am mildly interested, by the way), but it does sound like it should be given lower priority. > So that's where I gave up. Converting between signed and unsigned > variables needs to be done very carefully, as there are often subtle > impacts (e.g., loop terminations). And because we have so many sign > issues already, compiling with "-Wsign-compare", etc, isn't likely to > help. True. Thanks.
