Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 16:42:09 -0800 From: "David O'Brien" <obrien@freebsd.org> To: Garance A Drosihn <drosih@rpi.edu> Cc: Robert Watson <rwatson@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: gratuitous gcc warnings: unused function arguments? Message-ID: <20050117004209.GA62371@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <p06200722be10a1a3bf88@[128.113.24.47]> References: <Pine.NEB.3.96L.1050116120744.50371A-100000@fledge.watson.org> <p06200722be10a1a3bf88@[128.113.24.47]>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Jan 16, 2005 at 06:16:49PM -0500, Garance A Drosihn wrote: > In this specific case, would it make sense to change the code to be: > int > dummyfunction(int arg1, int arg2, char *argv) > { > > if (DUMMY_USES_ARGV && (argv != NULL)) > printf("dummyfunction: %s\n", argv); > return (arg1 + arg2); > } > > ? > > This does mean you must always define DUMMY_USES_ARGV to be 0 or 1 > (which is easy enough to do by using an #ifndef check up at the start > of the file). But it does remove the warning message (at least in gcc), > and in my testing it also seems to produce the same-size object-code > as the #ifdef version. I like this version much better. Requiring a #define symbol to be a set value isn't so bad. In fact it is a requirement in GCC'ville -- along with not using #ifdef, but rather "if(SYMBOL && )" so that all(most) code will be syntax checked an a build on arch system has less chance of breaking the build for another arch. -- -- David (obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050117004209.GA62371>