[LLVMdev] updated code size comparison
regehr at cs.utah.edu
Wed Jan 20 19:17:14 PST 2010
> clang warns and doesn't treat the usual declaration of memset as the C
> library memset if size_t is wrong; gcc apparently doesn't care.
Eli-- I looked at this code a bit more closely and it seems to me that (in
this particular case, by luck) the gcc strategy of ignoring the problem is
OK. Clang wants size_t to be an unsigned int, whereas in these files,
size_t is an unsigned long. I can't think of any observable difference
between these two types on x86-clang.
Anyway this doesn't form an argument that clang should relax its rules,
but it does indicate that gcc is probably not doing anything too silly.
More information about the llvm-dev