Jason Wood writes:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/15/2012 10:41 AM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> Jason Wood writes:
>>
>>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> On 10/12/2012 04:30 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
There are a number of places where some obscure
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/15/2012 03:50 PM, Chad Versace wrote:
>> On a side note, the "do { ... } while(0)" portion of the code
>> looks funny to me, and I have to assume that it is some oddball
>> compiler workaround. GCC works just fine when this code is
>> wrapped in
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/15/2012 10:41 AM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> Jason Wood writes:
>
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1
>>
>> On 10/12/2012 04:30 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>>> There are a number of places where some obscure piece of the
>>> code is not curr
On Mon, Oct 15, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Jason Wood wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/12/2012 04:30 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> There are a number of places where some obscure piece of the code
>> is not currently worth fixing, and we have some workaround behavior
>> availab
Jason Wood writes:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 10/12/2012 04:30 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
>> There are a number of places where some obscure piece of the code
>> is not currently worth fixing, and we have some workaround behavior
>> available. It's nicer for users to do
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 10/12/2012 04:30 PM, Eric Anholt wrote:
> There are a number of places where some obscure piece of the code
> is not currently worth fixing, and we have some workaround behavior
> available. It's nicer for users to do some lame workaround than to
>
There are a number of places where some obscure piece of the code is not
currently worth fixing, and we have some workaround behavior available. It's
nicer for users to do some lame workaround than to just assert, but without
asserts we never knew when the workaround was at fault.
This should giv
