Date: Sat, 21 Sep 2002 12:21:48 -0400 From: Mike Barcroft <mike@FreeBSD.org> To: Eric Melville <eric@FreeBSD.org> Cc: cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org, cvs-all@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/usr.bin/sed process.c Message-ID: <20020921122148.C51443@espresso.q9media.com> In-Reply-To: <20020921083216.A81079@FreeBSD.org>; from eric@FreeBSD.org on Sat, Sep 21, 2002 at 08:32:16AM -0700 References: <200209201940.g8KJeNqj059268@freefall.freebsd.org> <20020920194544.A51443@espresso.q9media.com> <20020920182706.A32662@FreeBSD.org> <20020920235606.B51443@espresso.q9media.com> <20020921083216.A81079@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Eric Melville <eric@FreeBSD.org> writes: > > > > Sounds like a compiler bug. This probably isn't correct for FreeBSD, > > > > since the system compiler doesn't have this bug. > > > > > > Try -Wall -Werror. > > > > The bug doesn't show up unless -Wuninitialized is specified. I > > thought I tried this before e-mailing you. In any event, the compiler > > is correct, p could have been uninitialized at line 198 (of the latest > > rev) in the psl == 0 case. > > Well, yes, and -Wuninitialized is turned on by the -Wall option. What are > you trying to say? At first it's a compiler bug, now the compiler is > correct? If there is some way you'd prefer this code to look, it would be > better to be more forward about it. I really don't mind how it looks as > long as it can be compiled when both -Wall and -Werror are specified. What I was saying is that I was mistaken, and that your commit was correct. Sorry if that wasn't clear. It was difficult for me to understand the intent of the commit. It sounded as though you were applying a hack to fix an incorrect compiler diagnostic. Best regards, Mike Barcroft To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020921122148.C51443>