This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On 03/30/2016 05:52 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
On 03/07/2016 09:05 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:On 03/07/2016 05:58 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:On 03/07/2016 10:58 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:On 03/07/2016 04:28 PM, Carlos O'Donell wrote:I tend to agree with Martin here, having that separation between test and data makes it easier to read and change the test or add more tests. If you're getting a warning from the compiler you expect but don't care about then you can just silence the warning with the appropriate attribute?The warning is not enabled by default (or even -W), so I'm not sure if that's even necessary.If the warning isn't enabled, then we don't need to worry about it today. The vision here is that we can run everything with -Werror, but we aren't there yet in some cases (see -Wundef fixes required).Okay, here is a table-based version of the test. Other parts of the patch are unchanged.Ping? https://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2016-03/msg00176.html
I like it. Martin
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |