On Tue, 16 Aug 2016, David Wohlferd wrote: > The next warnings to clean up (unused.patch) are pretty simple. Just a few > unused params. Note that since gs_support.c only leaves the param unused for > ARM, using __UNUSED_PARAM is impractical.
This one is fine with me, although I'm not sure if this would be a more common way to silence it: #define UNUSED_PARAM(x) (void)x Either way is fine with me though. > A slightly trickier (to explain) is tdelete.patch. Once upon a time, > comparing NULL to pointers was a simple thing. However new C standards get > picky about comparing function pointers. Other than using #pragma Diagnostic > to ignore the warning, this is the cleanest approach I've found. I don't mind it, but please quote the actual compiler warning that it fixes in the commit message. > A trivial change, but it took some thought for mingw_vfscanf.patch. The > spacing suggests the decrement belongs with the 'if', but without braces, > that's not what's going to happen. I believe the intent here is to 'not' > include it with the 'if.' At the very worst, it is no more broken after this > patch than it was before. Ok with me. I guess this warning comes from newer GCC versions that warn about broken indentation? I.e. another case where it's useful to include the actual warning in the commit message. > And one more: stdio.patch. Mingw-w64 shadows a number of compiler functions, > particularly in the scanf and printf families. Since there isn't any way to > "work around" that fact, all that remains is silencing the warnings. No objection from me here either. // Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Mingw-w64-public mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mingw-w64-public
