From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Sun Aug 28 07:36:22 2005
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
X-Original-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56D9316A41F;
	Sun, 28 Aug 2005 07:36:22 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from mailout1.pacific.net.au (mailout1.pacific.net.au [61.8.0.84])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C19CB43D45;
	Sun, 28 Aug 2005 07:36:21 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from bde@zeta.org.au)
Received: from mailproxy1.pacific.net.au (mailproxy1.pacific.net.au
	[61.8.0.86])
	by mailout1.pacific.net.au (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id
	j7S7a9BD023483; Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:36:09 +1000
Received: from katana.zip.com.au (katana.zip.com.au [61.8.7.246])
	by mailproxy1.pacific.net.au (8.13.4/8.13.4/Debian-3) with ESMTP id
	j7S7a2ZT002428; Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:36:07 +1000
Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 17:36:01 +1000 (EST)
From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au>
X-X-Sender: bde@delplex.bde.org
To: Craig Rodrigues <rodrigc@crodrigues.org>
In-Reply-To: <20050827235140.GA3063@crodrigues.org>
Message-ID: <20050828172712.T86328@delplex.bde.org>
References: <20050810005323.GA42721@crodrigues.org>
	<20050810032308.GA80916@dragon.NUXI.org>
	<20050827235140.GA3063@crodrigues.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: [RFC] -Wredundant-decls: keep it or remove it?
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2005 07:36:22 -0000

On Sat, 27 Aug 2005, Craig Rodrigues wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 09, 2005 at 08:23:08PM -0700, David O'Brien wrote:
>> This is a GCC bug that I am working to get fixed.
>
> Did you try something like this patch to GCC?
>
> Index: c-decl.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvsroot/gcc/gcc/gcc/c-decl.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.630.6.16
> diff -u -u -r1.630.6.16 c-decl.c
> --- c-decl.c	16 Aug 2005 20:34:19 -0000	1.630.6.16
> +++ c-decl.c	27 Aug 2005 23:43:06 -0000
> @@ -1559,7 +1559,10 @@
>       && !(DECL_EXTERNAL (olddecl) && !DECL_EXTERNAL (newdecl))
>       /* Don't warn about forward parameter decls.  */
>       && !(TREE_CODE (newdecl) == PARM_DECL
> -	   && TREE_ASM_WRITTEN (olddecl) && !TREE_ASM_WRITTEN (newdecl)))
> +	   && TREE_ASM_WRITTEN (olddecl) && !TREE_ASM_WRITTEN (newdecl))
> +      /* Don't warn about forward static variable decls.  */
> +      && !(TREE_CODE (newdecl) == VAR_DECL
> +	   && !TREE_PUBLIC (olddecl) && !TREE_PUBLIC (newdecl)))
>     {
>       warning ("%Jredundant redeclaration of %qD", newdecl, newdecl);
>       warned = true;

It should warn about static variable decls iff they are redundant.  This
requires determining if the new declaration adds info.  I couldn't find
any macros to help determine this, not even ones to say if the new
declaration has an initializer and the old one doesn't.

Also, it shouldn't say that a redundant decl is a "redundant redeclaration".
All (identical) redeclarations are redundant, but not all redundancies are
caused by (identical) redeclarations.

Bruce