* Colin Watson <cjwat...@debian.org> [130604 15:47]: > On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 10:08:59PM +0200, Michael Tautschnig wrote: > > I think this will likely improve code quality, hence I'm much in > > favour of this, in particular when it comes to outright bugs. But a > > non-negligible fraction of the build failures, I believe, are due to > > the use of nested functions. This could well be considered design > > decisions when used intentionally (unlike, e.g., [684508], where I > > have already filed a bug). I'm not sure whether upstream will be very > > keen on such bug reports? > > clang.debian.net lists 39 instances of these, though I think the buildd > is a bit behind so there are probably a few more.
At least one more of the 432 "Not categorized" is also due to this missing feature in clang (reprepro). As clang seems to gives quite misleading error messages in this case, I'd not be surprised if there are some more. > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/grub-devel/2013-01/msg00000.html Those arguments seem to be mostly related to tampolines, which is mostly an argument against having pointers to nested functions. Bernhard R. Link -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130605194043.ga3...@client.brlink.eu
