[ODE] Making it build again

[Jon Watte]

> > If you're not treating warnings as errors, well, you should! (I
> > don't want to argue about it, but you can't find anyone who's any
> > good who wouldn't agree).

> I was never arguing that we should ignore warnings, but it's a matter
> of priority.  If I have broken ODE so it doesn't compile, I'll fix it
> ASAP.  If I've introduced some warnings about implicit type
> conversions or whatever, the priority is not so high.

That's where I'm saying we disagree on how critical things are. 
Implicit type conversions breaks the compile, because WARNINGS 
ARE ERRORS. Now, you are a submitter; I'm not. However, in any 
code base I've ever worked, the quality has gone up when technical 
leadership has decided that warnings should break the compile, and 
the switch has been turned on. I am suggesting (although I'm 
failing to be humble about it) that you do the same thing in ODE.

> Actually, ODE compiles with nearly a hundred warnings (MS, dReal=double)
> and has done so for at least the last year (the time which I've been 
> using it).  I will try to fix all of these and check in the changes.

Interesting. I use dReal == float, and it works fine for me -- 
although I think I turned off the "this will break on win64" 
warnings. To my dismay, I might add, but there are some cases 
that requires bigger changes than I'm willing to commit to to 
fix all of that up.

Cheers,

			/ h+