Port-arm archive

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]

Re: 'build.sh release' broken for evbarm-eb and -el

Paul Goyette wrote:
> IMHO, we should actually fix the issue, rather than hide it.  But my
> goal here is only to get the port (and as many others as possible)
> to build, so I would defer to arm users to make a decision on how to
> proceed.

I don't see any issue with this. Let say you want to assign __swp return
to some variable x:

__cpu_simple_lock_t x = __swp(val, ptr);

__swp will discard volatile but the initialization of x will bring it

There are no reference types in C and hence it can't be missing '&' in
the return type. If there was an explicit 'volatile' in the return type,
it'd be probably an oversight but volatile is a part of typedef.

A very similar issue has been fixed for C++ code [1]. The code below
generates only one warning at line 5:

template<class T>
const T foo() { static T t; return t; }

typedef const int T;
const T bar() { return 0; }

int main()
        return foo<int>() + bar();

IMO, this warning if for information only and it doesn't mix with -Werror.


[1] http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=36760

Home | Main Index | Thread Index | Old Index