Обсуждение: GCC 6 warning fixes
Here are three patches to fix new warnings in GCC 6. 0001 is apparently a typo. 0002 was just (my?) stupid code to begin with. 0003 is more of a workaround. There could be other ways address this, too.
Вложения
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: > Here are three patches to fix new warnings in GCC 6. > > 0001 is apparently a typo. Right, looks like it. Builds and tests OK with this change (though I didn't get any warning from GCC6.0.0 -Wall for this one). > 0002 was just (my?) stupid code to begin with. Right, it makes sense to define QL_HELP in just one translation unit with external linkage. Builds and works fine. I got the 'defined but not used' warning from GCC6 and it went away with this patch. > 0003 is more of a workaround. There could be other ways address this, too. This way seems fine to me (you probably want the function to continue to exist rather than, say, becoming a macro evaluating to false on non-WIN32, if this gets backpatched). I got this warning from GCC6 and it went away with this patch. -- Thomas Munro http://www.enterprisedb.com
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Thomas Munro <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: >> Here are three patches to fix new warnings in GCC 6. >> >> 0001 is apparently a typo. > > Right, looks like it. Builds and tests OK with this change (though I > didn't get any warning from GCC6.0.0 -Wall for this one). > >> 0002 was just (my?) stupid code to begin with. > > Right, it makes sense to define QL_HELP in just one translation unit > with external linkage. Builds and works fine. I got the 'defined but > not used' warning from GCC6 and it went away with this patch. > >> 0003 is more of a workaround. There could be other ways address this, too. > > This way seems fine to me (you probably want the function to continue > to exist rather than, say, becoming a macro evaluating to false on > non-WIN32, if this gets backpatched). I got this warning from GCC6 > and it went away with this patch. Peter, are you going to commit this? -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
On 3/8/16 4:44 PM, Robert Haas wrote: > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 4:50 PM, Thomas Munro > <thomas.munro@enterprisedb.com> wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 5:14 PM, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e@gmx.net> wrote: >>> Here are three patches to fix new warnings in GCC 6. >>> >>> 0001 is apparently a typo. >> >> Right, looks like it. Builds and tests OK with this change (though I >> didn't get any warning from GCC6.0.0 -Wall for this one). >> >>> 0002 was just (my?) stupid code to begin with. >> >> Right, it makes sense to define QL_HELP in just one translation unit >> with external linkage. Builds and works fine. I got the 'defined but >> not used' warning from GCC6 and it went away with this patch. >> >>> 0003 is more of a workaround. There could be other ways address this, too. >> >> This way seems fine to me (you probably want the function to continue >> to exist rather than, say, becoming a macro evaluating to false on >> non-WIN32, if this gets backpatched). I got this warning from GCC6 >> and it went away with this patch. > > Peter, are you going to commit this? done