From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Jun 15 19:38:55 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F500106564A for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:38:55 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xcllnt@mac.com) Received: from asmtpout015.mac.com (asmtpout015.mac.com [17.148.16.90]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 17E688FC14 for ; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:38:54 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xcllnt@mac.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Received: from marcelm-sslvpn-nc.jnpr.net (nat-service4.juniper.net [66.129.225.151]) by asmtp015.mac.com (Sun Java(tm) System Messaging Server 6.3-8.01 (built Dec 16 2008; 32bit)) with ESMTPSA id <0KLA003V0P83PG60@asmtp015.mac.com>; Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:38:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <53E03A0A-8846-4EED-AE95-A15960FC6724@mac.com> From: Marcel Moolenaar To: Roman Divacky In-reply-to: <20090615185812.GA67104@freebsd.org> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 12:38:27 -0700 References: <20090615181555.GA52009@freebsd.org> <4A369529.5090004@freebsd.org> <20090615185812.GA67104@freebsd.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) Cc: Sam Leffler , current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [RFC]: (void)0 instead of empty defines X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 19:38:55 -0000 On Jun 15, 2009, at 11:58 AM, Roman Divacky wrote: >> Are you saying that: >> >> if (cond) >> ; >> >> is considered worthy of a warning by the compiler? Is it just "if" >> or >> all conditional control constructs (e.g. while)? >> >> I can image many instances of this construct arising from debugging >> facilities. This sounds like a stupid restriction and I would >> argue we >> should just disable the warning. > > it already found a bug in csup (recently fixed by lulf). It sure can > be > disabled but I'd like it to be discussed a little bit more as it > already > proved to be useful. If the patch is all we need to compile the kernel with the warning enabled and knowing that the warning has already found real bugs, then it's a no-brainer to me: commit. -- Marcel Moolenaar xcllnt@mac.com