Hi Dmitry, adding John on this.
unpack.cpp What is wrong with the unary operator ? Does this emit a compiler warning ? - sprintf(buf, ((uint)e.tag < CONSTANT_Limit)? TAG_NAME[e.tag]: "%d", e.tag); + if ((uint)e.tag < CONSTANT_Limit) { + sprintf(buf, "%s", TAG_NAME[e.tag]); + } + else { + sprintf(buf, "%d", e.tag); + } If you are eliminating the unary operator then, the formatting should be if (.....) ...... else ...... or if (.....) { .... else { <--- note, please don't introduce new formatting/conventions. .... } main.cpp: + (void) (fread(&filecrc, sizeof(filecrc), 1, u.infileptr) + 1); UGH. What about other compilers are they ok with this ? This may very well get suppressed for gcc, but might emit warnings on MSVC or SunStudio. I take it you have run all the open and internal regression tests. Thanks Kumar
Hi Everyone, It's my $0.02 to the warning cleanup work. Please review: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~dsamersoff/JDK-8073584/webrev.01/ Notes: I use an ugly trick: (void) (read() + 1) to get rid of ignored value warning because since gcc 4.6 just (void) is not enough. -Dmitry