From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/4811 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: build with clang-3.4 warnings report Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2014 21:57:09 -0400 Message-ID: <20140406015709.GX26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <533F0F1A.6040707@embtoolkit.org> <20140404204701.GO26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <533F56FB.8060509@embtoolkit.org> <20140405015443.GU26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1396688698.11744.258.camel@eris.loria.fr> <20140405130700.GV26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1396708669.11744.314.camel@eris.loria.fr> <20140405163512.GW26358@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <1396735703.11744.355.camel@eris.loria.fr> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1396749449 488 80.91.229.3 (6 Apr 2014 01:57:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 6 Apr 2014 01:57:29 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-4815-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun Apr 06 03:57:22 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WWcKo-0006mT-HN for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 06 Apr 2014 03:57:22 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 9936 invoked by uid 550); 6 Apr 2014 01:57:21 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 9928 invoked from network); 6 Apr 2014 01:57:21 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1396735703.11744.355.camel@eris.loria.fr> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:4811 Archived-At: On Sun, Apr 06, 2014 at 12:08:23AM +0200, Jens Gustedt wrote: > Am Samstag, den 05.04.2014, 12:35 -0400 schrieb Rich Felker: > > I'd be interested in seeing what you mean by some of these, but note > > that these are all +'s and don't seem to have any concrete advantages > > over the current code. > > I attach the cleanest and simplest version. (forget about the handling > of the historic mips case, if you don't like it) As usual you're the master of preprocessor tricks. Overall I like it, but it's still not as efficient as what we have now. Rich