From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=60862 helo=eggs.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1P675Q-0007KZ-Nr
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 15:34:05 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <blauwirbel@gmail.com>) id 1P675P-0003s3-NV
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 15:34:04 -0400
Received: from mail-qy0-f173.google.com ([209.85.216.173]:41590)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <blauwirbel@gmail.com>) id 1P675P-0003rz-Ka
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 15:34:03 -0400
Received: by qyk36 with SMTP id 36so759247qyk.4
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 13 Oct 2010 12:34:03 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTim35V-RrkKDLVPYaE-hXssXpP-8jWzrfC0aZ8yc@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTi=AFOyVNAtvQ_1s6LW=S9WiW4Z6vkGOZWExctE6@mail.gmail.com>
	<1286526743-10253-1-git-send-email-weil@mail.berlios.de>
	<AANLkTimiY6971M52HSq5FZG9BFs3LZ08wQhHYbiO3QUB@mail.gmail.com>
	<4CAF9072.8080600@mail.berlios.de> <4CB60173.3010605@mail.berlios.de>
	<AANLkTim35V-RrkKDLVPYaE-hXssXpP-8jWzrfC0aZ8yc@mail.gmail.com>
From: Blue Swirl <blauwirbel@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Oct 2010 19:33:40 +0000
Message-ID: <AANLkTim0dhORd6JoPppKNLpvn-SLNRC-amcV=tyxo8Xh@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Re: [PATCH] tcg: Fix compiler error (comparison of
	unsigned expression)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Hollis Blanchard <hollis@penguinppc.org>
Cc: QEMU Developers <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>

On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 7:22 PM, Hollis Blanchard <hollis@penguinppc.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 11:58 AM, Stefan Weil <weil@mail.berlios.de> wrote:
>>
>> Hollis, do you still see problems with my patch?
>> Or can it be committed?
>
> I have no objection; I was just anticipating Blue's objection when I
> commented previously. It's just a style question really...

Both ((int)op >= 0 && op < NB_OPS) and ((unsigned int)op < NB_OPS)
produce same binary (if NB_OPS < MAX_INT). During the earlier, long
discussion, the int version was preferred.