search for: c4242

...tal note about an incident where a > compiler once complained about this type of thing The problem was due to the following warning when compiling for 64-bit using using the latest WDK (7600.16385.1), with warning level 3 (/W3): 1>c:\rufus\src\syslinux\libinstaller\syslxmod.c(44) : warning C4242: '=' : conversion from 'sector_t' to 'unsigned int', possible loss of data I used to compile Rufus with /W3 everywhere when using WDK, but I have very recently reduced the warning level to /W2 for the Syslinux part (see [1]) , so that I could align with your source witho...

...3/6/2016 17:03, Pete Batard via Syslinux wrote: >> >> The problem was due to the following warning when compiling for 64-bit >> using using the latest WDK (7600.16385.1), with warning level 3 (/W3): >> >> 1>c:\rufus\src\syslinux\libinstaller\syslxmod.c(44) : warning C4242: '=' : >> conversion from 'sector_t' to 'unsigned int', possible loss of data > > > Then your patch seems like the most sensible solution, as this warning > identifies that the two objects have different types. That declaration > context wasn't incl...

On 2016.03.07 01:21, Shao Miller via Syslinux wrote: > 3. Disable the Microsoft precision warning, since Syslinux does lots of > this sort of thing. > > That last option seems pretty simple, without moving entirely from /W3 > to /W2. Could that work? (C4242) Unfortunately, there are some warnings that Microsoft, in their great wisdom, decided that driver developers should not choose to ignore, and this is one of them... /wd4242 (which is how you disable warnings in WDK), is one of the things I tried before going /W2, only to find that, unlike oth...

On 3/6/2016 17:03, Pete Batard via Syslinux wrote: > The problem was due to the following warning when compiling for 64-bit > using using the latest WDK (7600.16385.1), with warning level 3 (/W3): > > 1>c:\rufus\src\syslinux\libinstaller\syslxmod.c(44) : warning C4242: > '=' : conversion from 'sector_t' to 'unsigned int', possible loss of data Then your patch seems like the most sensible solution, as this warning identifies that the two objects have different types. That declaration context wasn't included in the patch; too fa...

On 2016.03.06 13:13, Gene Cumm wrote: > Did Visual Studio actually complain about this one? WDK compiler (which I also use) if I recall correctly. At any rate, some older compilers do not like double initializations like this one, and I don't think this change should be much of a contention point, since it doesn't introduce any liability. Regards, /Pete