[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <986ddfaff4378b663b011609180aece3@smtp.hushmail.com>
Date: Mon, 6 May 2013 07:16:29 +0200
From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Core: build warning
On 6 May, 2013, at 2:47 , Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
> On Sun, May 05, 2013 at 08:15:11PM +0200, magnum wrote:
>> inc.c: In function ?do_incremental_crack?:
>> inc.c:478: warning: comparison is always false due to limited range of data type
>
> Yes, I had expected that we'd get this sort of warnings, and I was
> surprised I was not getting any of them. I still don't know why not.
> For me, gcc silently omits the "offending" check from generated code.
Fwiw I got it from clang, gcc 4.7 & 4.8 are silent here too. as well as llvm-gcc iirc.
magnum
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
