Re: four sparse patches

[Josh Triplett <josh@kernel.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1126 bytes --]

Geoff Johnstone wrote:
>>  Regarding Wmix-decl-code.diff, I agree that that warning definitely
>>  needs an option controlling it. but GCC already has that option and
>>  calls it "-Wdeclaration-after-statement", so matching GCC's name
>>  seems potentially useful. (However, I can imagine corner cases
>>  where it might prove problematic, such as wanting to pass that
>>  option to GCC and not Sparse or vice versa.) Also, I agree that the
>>  default should depend on the C standard in use, and I see no
>>  compatibility reason why the warning should remain for code that
>>  explicitly asks for C99.  Thus, I haven't applied this version of
>>  the patch.
> 
> I've attached a revised version of the patch that:
>  - Renames the option to -Wdeclaration-after-statement, as per GCC
>    (wasn't hitherto aware of that gcc option).
>  - Defaults based on chosen C dialect.
>  - Adds a few tests. (I'll do a separate patch for tests for the
>    incomplete struct patch.)
>  - Was made wrt the git trunk at about 11:30 UTC on 12th April.

Looks good; applied and pushed.  Thanks!

- Josh Triplett



[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]