From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <4A8049D6.3000207@tecmav.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 18:24:54 +0200
From: Adriano Verardo <a.verardo@tecmav.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US;
	rv:1.8.1.17) Gecko/20080829 SeaMonkey/1.1.12
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
References: <49ccd5544bd81e479a4fa8c360d6ac1f@quanstro.net>
In-Reply-To: <49ccd5544bd81e479a4fa8c360d6ac1f@quanstro.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] Unexpected 8c warning message
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 40bf91d6-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

erik quanstrom wrote:
>> It's a pity. In other - more complicated - situations I found such
>> warnings appropriate and very helpful.
>> Could that case be recognised during the variable-scope analysis on the
>> intermediate format (tuples ?) ?
>> I don't remember what D.Gries and others said about and I don't know the
>> 8c internals at all.
>> It's just an academic question I do for cultural interest.
>> IMHO 8c is better than gcc even if sometimes it wrongly complains about
>> variables use.
>>
>
> sure, one could perform all sorts of analysis on the code.
> but i think that would be beside the point.
? ... sicerely, I don't understand the exact meaning of these sentences
in this context.
Please, could you express the same concept with different words ?
> i find that code that is subtle
> enough to evoke a warning often needs to be simplified
> for the benefit of other humans — or even the author in
> a week.
>
Absolutely true.
But I got a subtle compiler message about a very very simple and short
piece of code.

> in your case, you can either provide a dummy assignment
> or use SET(var) to inform 8c that it can forget about that
> warning.
>
I didn't know SET(var) so I used a dummy assignment, as you can see in
my original mail.
Both seems to me a medicine worst than the disease. Personal opinion, of
course.

adriano