Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site oliveb.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!epsilon!zeta!sabre!bellcore!allegra!oliveb!jerry
From: jerry@oliveb.UUCP (Jerry Aguirre)
Newsgroups: net.bugs.usg
Subject: Re: "lint" lets very bad code pass
Message-ID: <539@oliveb.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 30-Jul-85 22:42:19 EDT
Article-I.D.: oliveb.539
Posted: Tue Jul 30 22:42:19 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 1-Aug-85 22:13:41 EDT
References: <2454@sun.uucp>
Distribution: net
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino, Ca
Lines: 16

> The V7 "lint" (or, at least, the version of it that comes with 4.2BSD),
> gives error messages for code that passes an "int" value to a routine that
> expects a "long" or pointer value, even though such code is likely to work
> on 4.2BSD systems which will have 32-bit "int"s.
> 
> However, the System V Release 2 "lint" had code added to it *specifically*
> to prevent it from complaining about this on machines with sizeof(int) ==
> sizeof(long) if the actual argument is a constant.  This is a bad idea for
> several reasons:
> 	Guy Harris

A test like this should be under control of the -p or -c option of lint.
Does it still allow int-long equality if you use the -p option?

				Jerry Aguirre @ Olivetti ATC
{hplabs|fortune|idi|ihnp4|tolerant|allegra|tymix}!oliveb!jerry