[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: const qualifier violation in regex.c:re_comp()
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: const qualifier violation in regex.c:re_comp() |
Date: |
Tue, 5 Oct 2004 17:28:23 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5 |
> There is another change to regex.c that was reported against regex.c
> that might be well to fix in the GNULIB version.
>
> Index: lib/regex.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvsroot/gnulib/gnulib/lib/regex.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.84
> diff -u -p -r1.84 regex.c
> --- lib/regex.c 4 Oct 2004 21:00:42 -0000 1.84
> +++ lib/regex.c 5 Oct 2004 14:57:42 -0000
> @@ -4970,7 +4970,7 @@ weak_alias (__re_search_2, re_search_2)
> #ifdef INSIDE_RECURSION
>
> #ifdef MATCH_MAY_ALLOCATE
> -# define FREE_VAR(var) if (var) REGEX_FREE (var); var = NULL
> +# define FREE_VAR(var) if (var) (void)REGEX_FREE ((void *)var); var = NULL
> #else
> # define FREE_VAR(var) if (var) free (var); var = NULL
> #endif
I vote against such changes because
1) MSVC emits warnings for many constructs which are perfectly valid C
and don't indicate a bug in most cases (such as passing a 'short'
value as argument to a function which expects an 'int', or vice versa),
2) The GNU standards say on this topic: "The compiler should be your servant,
not your master."
GCC's -Wall produces a reasonable set of warnings, MSVC -W2 or -W3 doesn't.
Bruno
- const qualifier violation in regex.c:re_comp(), Martin Neitzel, 2004/10/01
- const qualifier violation in regex.c:re_comp(), Mark D. Baushke, 2004/10/04
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: const qualifier violation in regex.c:re_comp(), Martin Neitzel, 2004/10/11
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: const qualifier violation in regex.c:re_comp(), Derek Robert Price, 2004/10/14
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: const qualifier violation in regex.c:re_comp(), Bruno Haible, 2004/10/15
- Re: [Bug-gnulib] Re: const qualifier violation in regex.c:re_comp(), Derek Robert Price, 2004/10/15