On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 10:01 AM, Clément Bœsch <u...@pkh.me> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 09:31:49AM -0400, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 7, 2015 at 8:59 AM, Clément Bœsch <u...@pkh.me> wrote: >> > On Tue, Oct 06, 2015 at 06:53:47PM -0400, Ganesh Ajjanagadde wrote: >> >> This adds av_warn_unused_result whenever it is relevant. >> >> >> >> Signed-off-by: Ganesh Ajjanagadde <gajjanaga...@gmail.com> >> >> --- >> >> libavfilter/buffersrc.h | 3 +++ >> >> 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) >> >> >> >> diff --git a/libavfilter/buffersrc.h b/libavfilter/buffersrc.h >> >> index cd3d95f..847c093 100644 >> >> --- a/libavfilter/buffersrc.h >> >> +++ b/libavfilter/buffersrc.h >> >> @@ -78,6 +78,7 @@ unsigned >> >> av_buffersrc_get_nb_failed_requests(AVFilterContext *buffer_src); >> >> * This function is equivalent to av_buffersrc_add_frame_flags() with the >> >> * AV_BUFFERSRC_FLAG_KEEP_REF flag. >> >> */ >> >> +av_warn_unused_result >> >> int av_buffersrc_write_frame(AVFilterContext *ctx, const AVFrame *frame); >> >> >> >> /** >> >> @@ -98,6 +99,7 @@ int av_buffersrc_write_frame(AVFilterContext *ctx, >> >> const AVFrame *frame); >> >> * This function is equivalent to av_buffersrc_add_frame_flags() without >> >> the >> >> * AV_BUFFERSRC_FLAG_KEEP_REF flag. >> >> */ >> >> +av_warn_unused_result >> >> int av_buffersrc_add_frame(AVFilterContext *ctx, AVFrame *frame); >> >> >> >> /** >> >> @@ -115,6 +117,7 @@ int av_buffersrc_add_frame(AVFilterContext *ctx, >> >> AVFrame *frame); >> >> * @return >= 0 in case of success, a negative AVERROR code >> >> * in case of failure >> >> */ >> >> +av_warn_unused_result >> >> int av_buffersrc_add_frame_flags(AVFilterContext *buffer_src, >> >> AVFrame *frame, int flags); >> >> >> > >> > Aren't you just supposed to (void)-prefix the call in the caller when you >> > explicitly don't care about the result? >> > >> > These functions certainly looks like you actually want to check for the >> > result most of the time. >> >> Exactly - this addition to the declaration in the header will trigger >> a warning whenever this function is used without obtaining the return >> value. >> > > Oh, my bad, I misunderstood, sounds indeed saner than what I had in mind. > > Thanks for the clarification.
By the way, I highly encourage all developers to slowly start adding this to relevant headers, at least in the things they respectively maintain. For instance, a bunch of possible bugs/robustness issues will be fixed. Here is one I noticed today: by applying to init_get_bits8, a few warnings get triggered. There have been commits from Michael addressing some CID's related to this - this will ensure a complete weeding out of that particular issue. > > -- > Clément B. > > _______________________________________________ > ffmpeg-devel mailing list > ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org > http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel > _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
