From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jeff King Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Revert "make error()'s constant return value more visible" Date: Mon, 5 May 2014 02:29:31 -0400 Message-ID: <20140505062931.GA9311@sigill.intra.peff.net> References: <1399183975-2346-1-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <1399183975-2346-2-git-send-email-felipe.contreras@gmail.com> <20140505054901.GA19331@sigill.intra.peff.net> <5367257a857ce_2db613a731043@nysa.notmuch> <20140505060202.GA27360@sigill.intra.peff.net> <53672c53f2ed9_2e86acd30c6e@nysa.notmuch> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Cc: git@vger.kernel.org To: Felipe Contreras X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Tue May 06 18:15:43 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WhhtK-0005Yp-3I for gcvg-git-2@plane.gmane.org; Tue, 06 May 2014 18:06:50 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754670AbaEEG3d (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2014 02:29:33 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:45111 "HELO peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754473AbaEEG3d (ORCPT ); Mon, 5 May 2014 02:29:33 -0400 Received: (qmail 24569 invoked by uid 102); 5 May 2014 06:29:33 -0000 Received: from c-71-63-4-13.hsd1.va.comcast.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (71.63.4.13) (smtp-auth username relayok, mechanism cram-md5) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with ESMTPA; Mon, 05 May 2014 01:29:33 -0500 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Mon, 05 May 2014 02:29:31 -0400 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53672c53f2ed9_2e86acd30c6e@nysa.notmuch> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 01:14:43AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > Jeff King wrote: > > On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 12:45:30AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > > > Jeff King wrote: > > > > On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 01:12:53AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > > > > > > > > So it looks like gcc is smarter now, and in trying to fix a few warnings > > > > > we generated hundreds more. > > > > > > > > > > This reverts commit e208f9cc7574f5980faba498d0aa30b4defeb34f. > > > > > > > > And now we've gone the other way, and re-enabled the initial warnings. > > > > Can we come up with a solution that helps both cases? > > > > > > What initial warnings? As I explained already I don't get any warnings > > > with this patch series in gcc 4.9.0. > > > > The "few warnings" in your statement quoted above. > > > > You could try reading the commit message of the commit you are > > reverting, which explains it, but the short answer is: try compiling > > with -O3. > > Sigh. And I'm the one with the abrasive style of communication. I apologize if that seemed abrasive. I am slightly annoyed that you seemed to be reverting my commit without understanding (or dealing with) the problem that the original fixed. But I was _also_ trying to point you in the right direction by directing you to -O3. Do you see the problem now? And did you look at the follow-up patch I sent? -Peff