Re: [RFC PATCH 2/2] MSVC: Fix an "incompatible pointer types" compiler warning

[Johannes Sixt <j.sixt@viscovery.net>]

Ramsay Jones schrieb:
> In order to avoid the compiler warning, we use the appropriate
> structure type names (and function names) from the msvc headers.
> This allows us to compile with -D_USE_32BIT_TIME_T if necessary.

"if necessary"? Who defines when -D_USE_32BIT_TIME_T is necessary?

> Also, I added the "&& defined(_stati64)" in the hope that it would work with
> older msvc/sdk versions.

I think that this is an unnecessary complication and I did wonder why you
added this extra check. Anybody doing some serious development with MS's
tools is using VS2005 at least. But isn't the .vcproj file made for VS2008
anyway?

> The reason for the RFC is:
> 
>     - maybe we don't need the flexibility of compiling with/without the 32-bit
>       time_t definition (which *works* BTW) and can revert to the original patch?

Indeed I'm wondering why we should cater for 64 bit time_t. It is an
unnessary complication as long as MinGW gcc supports only 32 bit time_t
and the old MSVCRT.DLL.

>     - I *think* this will work with older msvc, but I can't test it!

This should not be a concern, IMHO.

>     - I've tried to be careful not to break the MinGW build, but again I can't
>       test it. (I will be shocked if I have ;-)

It compiles without warnings and doesn't break t/t[01]* ;)

-- Hannes