On Thu, 29 Nov 2007, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
>> I checked again and if we don't address this we'll get two new warnings
>> issues in a default build with GCC 4.3. How does the patch below
>> look?
> Not good, it adds noise to the code for no good reason. Why would gcc
> complain about that one?
Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Alexandre,
>
> I checked again and if we don't address this we'll get two new warnings
> issues in a default build with GCC 4.3. How does the patch below
> look?
Not good, it adds noise to the code for no good reason. Why would gcc
complain about that
On Wed, 3 Oct 2007, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> This can't happen. If there's no ret instruction in the entry point
> we'll have much bigger problems than an out of range access...
Fair point, I guess you're right. How about the following patch then?
Gerald
Index: relay16.c
Gerald Pfeifer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Looking at this code it becomes clear we perform out of range array
> accesses in those cases we execute the full loops.
This can't happen. If there's no ret instruction in the entry point
we'll have much bigger problems than an out of range access...
