On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 06:51:25PM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
> Hey Nicholas,
>
> Just to be clear, I wasn't directing my concern at anyone, nor am I
> not glad for the work, heck you've probably contributed more to this project
> than me. It was just a general concern that I felt should be thou
At 10:12 PM 1/15/2002 +, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 03:06:45PM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
> > Eep, you are right, as usual I answered a non-existing question, but
> > this brings up a point. Various times I've seen people changing
> > "signedness" of variables, etc. in one
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 03:06:45PM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
> Eep, you are right, as usual I answered a non-existing question, but
> this brings up a point. Various times I've seen people changing
> "signedness" of variables, etc. in one or two places to clear up a
> few warnings and I'm wonderi
Andy Dougherty:
# On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Melvin Smith wrote:
#
# > Maybe set the check to :
# >
# > if(rx->startindex-- == 0)
#
# That still sets startindex to the equivalent of (unsigned)
# -1, which might
# be something like 4294967295. I'm wondering whether that was
# the actual
# intent.
On Tue, 15 Jan 2002, Melvin Smith wrote:
> Maybe set the check to :
>
> if(rx->startindex-- == 0)
That still sets startindex to the equivalent of (unsigned) -1, which might
be something like 4294967295. I'm wondering whether that was the actual
intent. I suspect probably not. Perhaps Br
PROTECTED]>
01/15/2002 03:19 Subject: Re: gcc warnings:
rx->startindex
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 03:06:45PM -0500, Melvin Smith wrote:
> To be clear, what Andy is doing is the right thing (asking what the
> intent of a piece of code is), but I doubt everyone does this and
> I'm sure Dan doesn't check every single line of every patch before
> eating each one, or if he d
cc: Andy Dougherty
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Perl6 Internals
01/15/2002 02:26 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PM
cc:
Subject: gcc warnings: rx->startindex
01/15/2
On Tue, Jan 15, 2002 at 02:06:17PM -0500, Tanton Gibbs wrote:
> You could break it up into:
>
> else if( rx->startindex == 0 ) {
> goto OFFSET($2);
> }
> else {
> --rx->startindex
> }
Or simply change the condition to 'if (rx->startindex-- == 0)'. But
the real question he's asking is: what i
You could break it up into:
else if( rx->startindex == 0 ) {
goto OFFSET($2);
}
else {
--rx->startindex
}
- Original Message -
From: "Andy Dougherty" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Perl6 Internals" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 15,
Ok, I've been paging through the hundreds of errors spewn out by gcc
with the new -Wkitchen_sink warnings. Some are pretty clear, but
many others raise questions I'm unsure how to answer.
For example, given the following structure in "parrot/rx.h"
(note that startindex is unsigned):
typedef
12 matches
Mail list logo
