Re: Re: [PATCH] exif warning fix?

On Thu, Mar 10, 2005 at 11:23:51AM +0100, Ard Biesheuvel wrote: > Joe Orton wrote: > >Testing "length >= LONG_MAX" where length is an int is always false, and > >gcc gives a warning for it. Perhaps something like this was intended? > > > > On 64-bit it is always false, however on 32-bit 'length == LONG_MAX' can > be true. That's probably why noone caught the warning so far, as gcc > would not emit it on a 32-bit system. > > If you're testing for overflow, casting to unsigned int won't help you > here, as the overflow will already have occurred when length was > assigned its value. Yes, sorry, I haven't turned my brain on yet this morning. So perhaps a test for (length < 0) is all that's really needed; I can't see why length == INT_MAX is particularly a special case here... joe