On Fri, Oct 05, 2007 at 09:22:53PM +0200, Christian Stimming wrote: > Am Donnerstag, 4. Oktober 2007 22:56 schrieb Andrew Sackville-West: > > At jsled's prompting, I'm taking a stab at hacking my way through gcc > > 4.2.1 (debian) warnings. And, at warlord's oh-so-kind prompting, I'm > > actually trying to do something about them. > > Patches are always great! Thanks for picking up this work on the newest gcc.
:). I don't know how much I can actually do but I'll poke away at it here and there. If gives my computer something to do while I try to grok the gnc:html-table-foo code to try and make it a little snappier (that's the itch I'm currently trying to scratch as it now takes me a good long while to run an income statement). > > However, in this particular case I think you didn't fix the warning the right > way: > > > --- engine/TransLog.c (revision 16547) > > +++ engine/TransLog.c (working copy) > > @@ -273,7 +273,7 @@ > > gnc_numeric_denom(amt), > > gnc_numeric_num(val), > > gnc_numeric_denom(val), > > - drecn ? drecn : ""); > > + drecn[0] == 0 ? drecn : ""); > > } > > > > fprintf (trans_log, "===== END\n"); > > The whole point of the expression (drecn ? drecn : "" ) is in long form > (drecn != NULL ? drecn : ""), in other words, if the char pointer is > non-NULL, use it, but otherwise use the pointer to an empty string. This is > important for some OS which would crash if a NULL pointer is passed to > printf() and friends, hence they should only get a (non-NULL) empty string. > Your change, however, is a different expression: With your case, if the char > pointer points to a non-empty string, use it, but otherwise use the pointer > to an empty string. > > Which points me to the question: Which gcc warning did you try to fix here? jsled already answered this. THanks for the little lesson. I'll be posting more of them soon. > > Looking more into context, it turns out drecn is a local char buffer anyway, > hence it can't be NULL anyway. Because of this, here (and only here) you > should replace the expresssion direcly by drecn, i.e. > > - drecn ? drecn : ""); > + drecn); okay. I think I understand. drecn is a pointer and as such has the potential to be NULL which is very bad forthat one OS. But in this case, drecn is locally declared as a pointer to a character buffer and won't ever be NULL. hence, its okay to just pass it. right? > > Thanks a lot for starting to fix these warnings! :) A
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
