On 2006-03-19, Chris Liechti <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>I'm going to have a go at patching the compiler to get rid of
>>>it either altogether,
>>
>> I'm lazy, so I just disabled that warning completely. Here's
>> the patch agains gcc 3.2.whatever.
>
> i've scanned the gcc sources and docs and found that
> #pragma GCC system_header
> sets the "in_system_header" variable seen in th ecode below.
> however, that does not help directly in our case, as the "system header"
> tag is not carried along with the function like macro.
Yea, I saw that it was checking in_system_header, but didn't
follow through to see how to flip that switch to the "on"
position.
> it however switches the warning if you put it in the source
> file (or include it within the _BIC_SR_IRQ macro using
> _Pragma("...")). but it also disables all the warnings for the
> rest of the file, after the macro is used :-(
That doesn't sound good. I can easily live with the
__FUNCTION__ concatenation warning disabled everywhere, since
that's just not something I'm likely to do (and if I do it and
it breaks in gcc 4.x, I'll fix it then).
> i guess the patch isn't that bad. i'll probably include it for
> future releases.
That would be cool, thanks.
--
Grant Edwards grante Yow! I'm an East Side
at TYPE...
visi.com
