From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) id RAA03353; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:31:47 +0200 (MET DST)
X-Authentication-Warning: pauillac.inria.fr: majordomo set sender to owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr using -f
Received: from concorde.inria.fr (concorde.inria.fr [192.93.2.39]) by pauillac.inria.fr (8.7.6/8.7.3) with ESMTP id RAA03342 for <caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr>; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:31:46 +0200 (MET DST)
Received: from shiva.jussieu.fr (shiva.jussieu.fr [134.157.0.129])
	by concorde.inria.fr (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i4HFVjSH019791;
	Mon, 17 May 2004 17:31:45 +0200
Received: from localhost (akasha.ijm.jussieu.fr [134.157.173.57])
          by shiva.jussieu.fr (8.12.11/jtpda-5.4) with ESMTP id i4HFVjKc088311
          ; Mon, 17 May 2004 17:31:45 +0200 (CEST)
X-Ids: 168
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 17:31:37 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <20040517.173137.36610286.andrieu@ijm.jussieu.fr>
To: damien.doligez@inria.fr
Cc: caml-list@inria.fr
Subject: Re: [Caml-list] Question about warning message.
From: Olivier Andrieu <andrieu@ijm.jussieu.fr>
In-Reply-To: <81538EBA-A810-11D8-8794-00039310CAE8@inria.fr>
References: <Pine.LNX.4.44.0405051658360.1700-100000@nutella.di.unipi.it>
	<20040505160230.GA26320@davidb.org>
	<81538EBA-A810-11D8-8794-00039310CAE8@inria.fr>
X-Mailer: Mew version 4.0.64 on Emacs 21.3 / Mule 5.0 (SAKAKI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Miltered: at concorde with ID 40A8DAE1.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Miltered: at shiva.jussieu.fr with ID 40A8DAE1.000 by Joe's j-chkmail (http://j-chkmail.ensmp.fr)!
X-Antivirus: scanned by sophie at shiva.jussieu.fr
X-Loop: caml-list@inria.fr
X-Spam: no; 0.00; caml-list:01 andrieu:01 andrieu:01 damien:01 2004:99 gcc:01 struct:01 nitems:01 gcc:01 struct:01 nitems:01 dummy:01 dummy:01 caml:01 caml:01 
Sender: owner-caml-list@pauillac.inria.fr
Precedence: bulk

 Damien Doligez [Mon, 17 May 2004]:
 > > BTW, what about having a
 > >   (void) caml__dummy_##x;
 > >
 > > at the end of the CAMLxparam... macros?  This does shut up the warning,
 > > at least on gcc.
 > 
 > If we do that, the CAMLxparam macros can no longer be used in a
 > context of declarations.  These macros must include only definitions
 > because of the restrictive syntax of C.

I think that the OP meant to add that line in the (...) that is part of
the definition. Something like this:

#define CAMLxparam1(x) \
  struct caml__roots_block caml__roots_##x; \
  int caml__dummy_##x = ( \
    (caml__roots_##x.next = local_roots), \
    (local_roots = &caml__roots_##x), \
    (caml__roots_##x.nitems = 1), \
    (caml__roots_##x.ntables = 1), \
    (caml__roots_##x.tables [0] = &x), \
    (void) caml__dummy_##x, \
    0)

Amazingly, this seems to "work" as well (work = silence gcc) :

#define CAMLxparam1(x) \
  struct caml__roots_block caml__roots_##x; \
  int caml__dummy_##x = ( \
    (caml__roots_##x.next = local_roots), \
    (local_roots = &caml__roots_##x), \
    (caml__roots_##x.nitems = 1), \
    (caml__roots_##x.ntables = 1), \
    (caml__roots_##x.tables [0] = &x), \
    caml__dummy_##x)

-- 
   Olivier

-------------------
To unsubscribe, mail caml-list-request@inria.fr Archives: http://caml.inria.fr
Bug reports: http://caml.inria.fr/bin/caml-bugs FAQ: http://caml.inria.fr/FAQ/
Beginner's list: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ocaml_beginners