Re: 2.4.9 does not compile [PATCH]

Roman Zippel
2001-08-17T03:35:21Z

Hi,

"David S. Miller" wrote:

> Because comparing a signed value with an unsigned value is a perfectly
> sane operation and one should not have to put dumb casts into the
> expression or change the types just to avoid a compiler warning.

BTW I just looked through the patch and I only found a single cast, so
there was not much need for such dumb casts. Your patch now forced the
cast into all of them...

bye, Roman