Re: svn commit: r1759415 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/include/http_config.h

On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Joe Orton wrote: > On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 02:26:54PM +0200, Yann Ylavic wrote: >> Maybe we could backport r1702948 (and this commit, which I think is a >> better naming for the attribute) ? > > +1 from me to doing both, these new warnings are

Re: svn commit: r1759415 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/include/http_config.h

On 09/09/2016 04:32 AM, Joe Orton wrote: On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 02:26:54PM +0200, Yann Ylavic wrote: This makes the static variable used in an inline function, which itself may be unused but compilers do not warn about this (usually...). WDYT? FWIW I'd substitute "usually" for "yet", I

Re: svn commit: r1759415 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/include/http_config.h

On Tue, Sep 06, 2016 at 02:26:54PM +0200, Yann Ylavic wrote: > Maybe we could backport r1702948 (and this commit, which I think is a > better naming for the attribute) ? +1 from me to doing both, these new warnings are annoying. MAYBE_UNSUED is definitely a better name. > Alternatively, if

Re: svn commit: r1759415 - /httpd/httpd/trunk/include/http_config.h

On Tue, Sep 6, 2016 at 2:07 PM, wrote: > Author: ylavic > Date: Tue Sep 6 12:07:39 2016 > New Revision: 1759415 > > URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1759415=rev > Log: > http_config: follow up to r1702948: maybe unused, yet maybe usefull too. I get plenty of warnings