> :The code is correct, which is why GCC only gives a warning and not an
> :error. Code looking like that are usually an indication of a
> :programmer error though, so GCC is perfectly right in warning about
> :it. This is similar to the compiler warning about unused variables,
> :which isn't a bug either but often indicates a programmer mistake.
> :
> :To make gcc shut up, you can apply the following patch to cdefs.h
> :which makes the warnings go away, without changing the semantics of the
> :include file in any way.
> :
> :
> :Index: cdefs.h
> :===================================================================
> :RCS file: /ncvs/src/sys/sys/cdefs.h,v
> :retrieving revision 1.28.2.8
> :diff -u -r1.28.2.8 cdefs.h
> :--- cdefs.h 18 Sep 2002 04:05:13 -0000 1.28.2.8
> :+++ cdefs.h 29 Jan 2003 21:23:30 -0000
> :@@ -269,6 +269,8 @@
> : * Our macros begin with two underscores to avoid namespace screwage.
> : */
> :
> :+#ifdef _POSIX_C_SOURCE
> :+
> : /* Deal with IEEE Std. 1003.1-1990, in which _POSIX_C_SOURCE == 1. */
> : #if _POSIX_C_SOURCE == 1
> : #undef _POSIX_C_SOURCE /* Probably illegal, but beyond caring now. */
> :@@ -280,6 +282,8 @@
> : #undef _POSIX_C_SOURCE
> : #define _POSIX_C_SOURCE 199209
> : #endif
> :+
> :+#endif /* _POSIX_C_SOURCE */
> :
> : /* Deal with various X/Open Portability Guides and Single UNIX Spec. */
> : #ifdef _XOPEN_SOURCE
> :
> :
|
Вариант для распечатки
Разговоры, обсуждение новостей (Public)
on 27-Июл-04, 10:48 
