From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MIOsg-0005ip-EG for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 21 Jun 2009 11:22:54 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MIOsc-0005hx-VV for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 21 Jun 2009 11:22:54 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=35532 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MIOsc-0005hu-Pk for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 21 Jun 2009 11:22:50 -0400 Received: from mx2.redhat.com ([66.187.237.31]:41332) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MIOsc-0000yk-C0 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Sun, 21 Jun 2009 11:22:50 -0400 Message-ID: <4A3E5071.7080407@redhat.com> Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:23:29 +0300 From: Avi Kivity MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH] cocoa.m issues fixed References: <61E57A9F-6D9A-4DF3-9CE6-0B8056DD1C60@web.de> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: qemu-devel.nongnu.org List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: G 3 Cc: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andreas_F=E4rber?= , qemu-devel@nongnu.org On 06/21/2009 05:06 PM, G 3 wrote: > > On Jun 21, 2009, at 6:10 AM, Andreas F=E4rber wrote: > >> >> Am 21.06.2009 um 03:19 schrieb G 3: >> >>> +int cocoa_keycode_to_qemu(int keycode); >>> + >> >> This seems unrelated. I believe you're trying to suppress a warning=20 >> I've been seeing on 10.5 as well - if so, please provide that as a=20 >> separate patch with appropriate description. >> > > This function prototype would eliminate this warning: > cocoa.m:233: warning: no previous prototype for `cocoa_keycode_to_qemu' > > Why a separate patch. Why not kill two birds with one stone? It's standard operating procedure. Suppose in addition to the two birds=20 you mention the patch also kills an innocent kitten. Since it's one=20 patch, if a fix is not immediately forthcoming, the maintainer has to=20 revert the patch, bringing both birds back to life. With one patch per bird, the maintainer can revert just the patch which=20 killed the kitten, leaving the other bird dead. It's also easier to review two small patches rather than one large patch. --=20 error compiling committee.c: too many arguments to function