Tweak HB_TAG and HB_UNTAG

uint32_t was getting promoted to signed int, which is not what we wanted...

Wow, clang has become good at generating warnings...

../../src/hb-common.h:349:29: warning: signed shift result (0xFF000000) sets the sign bit of the shift expression's type ('int') and becomes negative [-Wshift-sign-overflow]
  _HB_SCRIPT_MAX_VALUE                          = HB_TAG_MAX, /*< skip >*/
                                                  ^~~~~~~~~~
../../src/hb-common.h:93:20: note: expanded from macro 'HB_TAG_MAX'
 define HB_TAG_MAX HB_TAG(0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff)
                   ^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
../../src/hb-common.h:89:57: note: expanded from macro 'HB_TAG'
 define HB_TAG(c1,c2,c3,c4) ((hb_tag_t)((((uint8_t)(c1))<<24)|(((uint8_t)(c2))<<16)|(((uint8_t)(c3))<<8)|((uint8_t)(c4))))
                                         ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^ ~~
../../src/hb-common.h:349:3: warning: ISO C restricts enumerator values to range of 'int' (4294967295 is too large) [-Wpedantic]
  _HB_SCRIPT_MAX_VALUE                          = HB_TAG_MAX, /*< skip >*/
  ^                                               ~~~~~~~~~~
This commit is contained in:
Behdad Esfahbod 2018-09-30 05:34:30 -04:00
parent 8a31e40629
commit 00cd00e641

View File

@ -86,8 +86,8 @@ typedef union _hb_var_int_t {
typedef uint32_t hb_tag_t;
#define HB_TAG(c1,c2,c3,c4) ((hb_tag_t)((((uint8_t)(c1))<<24)|(((uint8_t)(c2))<<16)|(((uint8_t)(c3))<<8)|((uint8_t)(c4))))
#define HB_UNTAG(tag) ((uint8_t)((tag)>>24)), ((uint8_t)((tag)>>16)), ((uint8_t)((tag)>>8)), ((uint8_t)(tag))
#define HB_TAG(c1,c2,c3,c4) ((hb_tag_t)((((uint32_t)(c1)&0xFF)<<24)|(((uint32_t)(c2)&0xFF)<<16)|(((uint32_t)(c3)&0xFF)<<8)|((uint32_t)(c4)&0xFF)))
#define HB_UNTAG(tag) (((tag)>>24)&0xFF), (((tag)>>16)&0xFF), (((tag)>>8)&0xFF), ((tag)&0xFF)
#define HB_TAG_NONE HB_TAG(0,0,0,0)
#define HB_TAG_MAX HB_TAG(0xff,0xff,0xff,0xff)