> also, > > 209c203 > < char exitsts[2*ERRMAX]; > --- > > Waitmsg *exitsts = nil; > > is likely to generate used-and-not-set on amd64.
Wouldn't it be "set and not used" instead? -- David du Colombier
> also, > > 209c203 > < char exitsts[2*ERRMAX]; > --- > > Waitmsg *exitsts = nil; > > is likely to generate used-and-not-set on amd64.
Wouldn't it be "set and not used" instead? -- David du Colombier