Neal Norwitz wrote:
I'll leave this decision to Martin or someone else, since I'm not familiar with the ramifications. Since it was documented as unsigned, I think it's reasonable to consider changing. Though it could create signed-ness warnings in other modules. I'm not sure but it's possible it could create problems for C++ compilers since they are pickier.
My concern is not so much that it becomes unsigned in 2.4.4, but that it stops being a typedef for wchar_t on Linux. C++ code that uses that assumption might stop compiling.