On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 00:55:03 +0100, Roland Illig wrote:
> when I run lint with the -t flag for traditional C (which means before
> C90), I always get these warnings:
>
> $ >empty.c
> $ lint -t empty.c
> (1): warning: 'long double' is illegal in traditional C [266]
> (1): warning: function pro
It came up in chat today that dump/rmt uses hardcoded integer values
that are then passed as the flags argument of open. This is wrong for
several reasons.
The following patch corrects it. The rmt part is untested (don't have
a suitable setup to test it with) -- if someone who uses rmt could
check
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 07:26:13PM +, David Holland wrote:
> Question: should the defines go in a new or is that
> overkill? Right now they're pasted in both programs, which is not
> ideal but not a huge issue either.
Another question: is O_APPEND useful? Does it work to concat dump
files?
On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 00:55:03 +0100, Roland Illig wrote:
> when I run lint with the -t flag for traditional C (which means before
> C90), I always get these warnings:
>
> [...]
> Any objections to removing the -t flag and everything that belongs to it?
It seems to me the flag does what's advertis
On 3/17/21 2:32 PM, Hauke Fath wrote:
OTOH, I guess I‘ve seen too many people trying to be productive by
removing features that _they_ don't need...
+1
That seems to be a "modern" way of contributing, without much need for
knowledge...
On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 02:32:25PM +0100, Hauke Fath wrote:
> On Wed, 17 Mar 2021 00:55:03 +0100, Roland Illig wrote:
> > when I run lint with the -t flag for traditional C (which means before
> > C90), I always get these warnings:
> >
> > [...]
>
> > Any objections to removing the -t flag and ev
