|
|
Message-ID: <4d262f8a-6784-b53c-1bfa-7fa1182dae1e@mirbsd.de> Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2026 03:03:10 +0200 (CEST) From: Thorsten Glaser <tg@...bsd.de> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com cc: David Sparks <sparks05@...ton.me> Subject: Re: Some additional qsort patches On Tue, 14 Apr 2026, David Sparks wrote: > src/stdlib/qsort.c: Use plain "char" for opaque data > > "unsigned char" is more typing and inconsistent with the libc > interface conventions. It's all internal, anyway. I’d be *very* wary of this. In case of doubt, unsigned types are the correct choice, in general. In specific, unsigned chars compare different to maybe-signed ones. (I’ve not looked at the code in question, but I do recall debugging failures from using signed chars.) bye, //mirabilos -- <ch> you introduced a merge commit │<mika> % g rebase -i HEAD^^ <mika> sorry, no idea and rebasing just fscked │<mika> Segmentation <ch> should have cloned into a clean repo │ fault (core dumped) <ch> if I rebase that now, it's really ugh │<mika:#grml> wuahhhhhh
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.