Alexey Klimov wrote: > Hello, Oliver > Please, correct me if i'm wrong. > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Oliver Endriss <[email protected]> wrote: > > Patch from Alexey Klimov wrote: > >> The patch number 11569 was added via Mauro Carvalho Chehab > >> <[email protected]> > >> to http://linuxtv.org/hg/v4l-dvb master development tree. > >> > >> Kernel patches in this development tree may be modified to be backward > >> compatible with older kernels. Compatibility modifications will be > >> removed before inclusion into the mainstream Kernel > >> > >> If anyone has any objections, please let us know by sending a message to: > >> Linux Media Mailing List <[email protected]> > >> > > > > > > Obviously the code was correct. > > You should not start patching the source code for broken compilers! > > Mauro said that this version of compiler is supported(where warning is > appear), so we should deal with it. > If patch is wrong it should be reverted, sorry.
Imho a compiler is broken if it is generating a false warning. Currently I am running gcc 4.1.2. Neither this one nor any previous version I used has ever generated a warning here. Basically, the patch is not 'wrong'. It is misleading. - u8 r, g, b, blend; + u8 r, g = 0, b = 0, blend = 0; When you see the patched code during code review, you get the impression that the original developer did not know how C handles the evaluation of 'break' statements. That's why I don't like this patch. So you should at least add a comment like 'initialize variables to make compiler x.y.z happy' CU Oliver -- ---------------------------------------------------------------- VDR Remote Plugin 0.4.0: http://www.escape-edv.de/endriss/vdr/ ---------------------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ linuxtv-commits mailing list [email protected] http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linuxtv-commits
