Re: [9fans] compiler warnings for libavl/avl.c

["EBo" <ebo@sandien.com>]

erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> said:

> how about changing 9c so you don't get this warning?

At the moment the compiler is set to report all warnings (-Wall).  I would
rather ignore these two warnings then turn the warnings off.

Out of curiosity is there a reason why the subroutines should not be declared
void walkavl... instead of static void walkavl?  I understand that removing
the static declaration puts the two subroutines in question into global
namespace when linking to libavl.

I did a quick check and removing the static declaration removed the warnings,
and plan9port built without incident.

I hope I am not being annoying, I really am trying to get a sense of the
communities coding and process standards.

  Thanks and best regards,

  EBo --