https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
--- Comment #6 from Peter Eisentraut ---
This particular case is in system headers, but there are other cases that are
not, so this isn't going to help in general.
I think this is a legitimate way to write a function-like macro that has a
side-e
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
--- Comment #4 from Peter Eisentraut ---
Not really, because this code is in header files not under my control, and
those header files should presumably work with a variety of C compilers and
shouldn't need to rely on GCC extensions.
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=61081
--- Comment #2 from Peter Eisentraut ---
No, these "functions" need to have a usable return value, because someone could
write
if (!sigemptyset(...))
weirderror();
Priority: P3
Component: c
Assignee: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org
Reporter: peter_e at gmx dot net
OS X has the following system header definitions:
#define sigaddset(set, signo) (*(set) |= __sigbits(signo), 0)
#define sigdelset(set, signo) (*(set
http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=48778
Summary: gcc 4.6 -Waddress adds unhelpful new warning case
Product: gcc
Version: 4.6.0
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Severity: minor
Priority: P3
Component: c
AssignedTo: unass
