Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2013 00:13:19 -0400 (EDT) From: Benjamin Kaduk <kaduk@MIT.EDU> To: sbruno@freebsd.org Cc: "freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org" <freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: gperf -- #define for if (0) ; else for Message-ID: <alpine.GSO.1.10.1310210011120.4934@multics.mit.edu> In-Reply-To: <1382327705.2610.9.camel@localhost> References: <1382327705.2610.9.camel@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 20 Oct 2013, Sean Bruno wrote: > I don't even know why this is a thing in our code base. Its generating > a lot of clang noise due to -Wdangling-else > > /usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/gperf/../../../contrib/gperf/src/search.cc:417:15: > warning: add explicit braces to avoid dangling else [-Wdangling-else] > for (int i3 = imax; i3 >= 0; i3--) > ^ > /usr/src/gnu/usr.bin/gperf/../../../contrib/gperf/src/search.cc:39:22: > note: expanded from macro 'for' > #define for if (0) ; else for > ^ > > I see no reason to continue this and propose the removal of the line in > contrib/gperf/src/search.cc > > 37 > 38 /* Assume ISO C++ 'for' scoping rule. */ > 39 #define for if (0) ; else for StackOverflow (!) [1] suggests that they're a workaround for a bug in old versions of Visual Studio. Someone hand Sean the danish axe, please. -Ben [1] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/984878/what-is-the-possible-use-for-define-for-if-false-else-for
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?alpine.GSO.1.10.1310210011120.4934>