|
Check-in Number:
|
579 | |
| Date: |
2001-Jul-31 17:45:14 (local)
2001-Jul-31 15:45:14 (UTC) |
| User: | simons |
| Branch: | |
| Comment: |
Documented problem with 16-bit integers when passed through "...". |
| Tickets: |
|
| Inspections: |
|
| Files: |
|
ossp-pkg/srpc/TODO 1.10 -> 1.11
--- TODO 2001/07/31 15:34:06 1.10
+++ TODO 2001/07/31 15:45:14 1.11
@@ -44,6 +44,15 @@
[u]string,octets}
- regression tests for libxds (make check)
+ - 16bit Integers mean trouble when passing them through "...":
+
+ | xdr-encode-uint16.c:46: `xds_uint16_t' is promoted to `int' when passed through `...'
+ | xdr-encode-uint16.c:46: (so you should pass `int' not `xds_uint16_t' to `va_arg')
+
+ Maybe we should skip int16 support at all? Currently I work around
+ this problem by implicitely assuming that the short is promoted to
+ an int.
+
- XML: <int32>1234</int32>
uint32, int64, uint64,
|
|
ossp-pkg/xds/TODO 1.10 -> 1.11
--- TODO 2001/07/31 15:34:06 1.10
+++ TODO 2001/07/31 15:45:14 1.11
@@ -44,6 +44,15 @@
[u]string,octets}
- regression tests for libxds (make check)
+ - 16bit Integers mean trouble when passing them through "...":
+
+ | xdr-encode-uint16.c:46: `xds_uint16_t' is promoted to `int' when passed through `...'
+ | xdr-encode-uint16.c:46: (so you should pass `int' not `xds_uint16_t' to `va_arg')
+
+ Maybe we should skip int16 support at all? Currently I work around
+ this problem by implicitely assuming that the short is promoted to
+ an int.
+
- XML: <int32>1234</int32>
uint32, int64, uint64,
|
|
