Date:	Fri, 31 May 2002 13:06:17 +0300
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id:	<7443-Fri31May2002130616+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to:	<200205310919.LAA13003@lws256.lu.erisoft.se> (message from Martin
	Stromberg on Fri, 31 May 2002 11:19:07 +0200 (MET DST))
Subject:	Re: Patches for building with gcc 3.1 - tests chunk
References:	<200205310919 DOT LAA13003 AT lws256 DOT lu DOT erisoft DOT se>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> From: Martin Stromberg <eplmst AT epl DOT ericsson DOT se>
> Date: Fri, 31 May 2002 11:19:07 +0200 (MET DST)
> 
>     urand = ((double)rand()) / RAND_MAX;
> 
> gives this warning:
> 
> gcc @../../gcc.opt -I. -I- -I../../../include  -pg -c signals.c
> cc1.exe: warnings being treated as errors
> signals.c: In function `int_handler':
> signals.c:23: warning: cast does not match function type

That's madness.  Or a bug.

> Evidently this option is for detecting "p = (sucker_t
> *)malloc(sizeof(sucker_t));", which is nice and which I don't disagree
> with.

Same here.

> But, surely this is another useless one. When did casting from int to
> double become a non-matching type?

It isn't.  GCC is plain wrong here.

> In this case we explicitly want to convert to double. How to do
> that? Umm... Let's see... Perhaps we should cast it?!

We can multiply by 1.0 to work around the problem.  Or we could cast
something that is not a function, like this:

     urand = rand() / (double)RAND_MAX;

But it's a bug nonetheless.  Someone (tm) should report it.

- Raw text -