On 21.03.13 21:47, Jonathan Nieder wrote:
> Jeff King wrote:
>
>> And 4.3 was old enough for me to say "I do not care if you can run with
>> -Wall -Werror or not", let alone 4.2.
>
> Changes like this can only reveal bugs (in git or optimizers) that
> were hidden before, without regressing actual
Jeff King wrote:
> And 4.3 was old enough for me to say "I do not care if you can run with
> -Wall -Werror or not", let alone 4.2.
Changes like this can only reveal bugs (in git or optimizers) that
were hidden before, without regressing actual runtime behavior, so for
what it's worth I like them.
On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 12:10 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> In cases where the setting and access of a variable are
> protected by the same conditional flag, older versions of
> gcc would generate a "might be used unitialized" warning. We
> silence the warning by initializing the variable to itself,
> a
In cases where the setting and access of a variable are
protected by the same conditional flag, older versions of
gcc would generate a "might be used unitialized" warning. We
silence the warning by initializing the variable to itself,
a hack that gcc recognizes.
Modern versions of gcc are smart en
4 matches
Mail list logo
