From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S261159AbUGHLPX (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jul 2004 07:15:23 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264275AbUGHLPX (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jul 2004 07:15:23 -0400 Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:45265 "EHLO www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261159AbUGHLPW (ORCPT ); Thu, 8 Jul 2004 07:15:22 -0400 Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2004 12:15:21 +0100 From: viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk To: Gabriel Paubert Cc: tom st denis , Christoph Hellwig , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [OT] Re: 0xdeadbeef vs 0xdeadbeefL Message-ID: <20040708111521.GK12308@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk> References: <20040707184737.GA25357@infradead.org> <20040707185340.42091.qmail@web41112.mail.yahoo.com> <20040708093249.GC32629@iram.es> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20040708093249.GC32629@iram.es> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, Jul 08, 2004 at 11:32:50AM +0200, Gabriel Paubert wrote: > Yes, I know and I use BK. But given the fact that you insult me for > better knowing C rules than you, I'm seriously considering switch > to subversion or arch instead. > > Argh, I've mentioned BK. There should be a Goldwin's law equivalent > for BitKeeper on lkml ;-) Godwin, surely? Anyway, if you think that suckversion authors knew C... Try to read their decoder/parser/whatever you call the code handling the data stream obtained from other end of connection. _Especially_ when it comes to signedness (of integers, mostly). > - the aforementioned fgetc/getc/getchar issues. ... have nothing to do with char; getc() has more legitimate return values than char can represent. No matter whether it's signed or unsigned, if you have ... char c; ... c = getc(); you have a bug - Dirichlet Principle bites you anyway.