bug#35062: [PATCH 0/4] Trivial code cleanups

[Konstantin Kharlamov <hi-angel@yandex.ru>]

On Пн, Apr 1, 2019 at 15:27, Robert Pluim <rpluim@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>  On Mon, 01 Apr 2019 07:37:23 +0300, Eli Zaretskii 
>>>>>> <eliz@gnu.org> said:
> 
>     >> From: Konstantin Kharlamov <Hi-Angel@yandex.ru> Date: Mon, 1
>     >> Apr 2019 01:37:38 +0300
>     >>
>     >> These are mostly fixes of some of LGTM warnings
>     >> 
> https://lgtm.com/projects/g/emacs-mirror/emacs/alerts/?mode=tree
>     >>
>     >> Except the second patch, where I initially wanted to fix one
>     >> warning, and as part of it I had to constify a variable to see
>     >> that it is indeed immutable. And then I figured I could search
>     >> through the code and find more similar places, where variables
>     >> weren't marked as const. I like this cleanup because it is
>     >> simple and trivially testable (i.e. if it compiles, then it's
>     >> fine). FTR: there's still lots of opportunities for
>     >> constification, I just stopped at some point.
> 
>     Eli> Thanks.
> 
>     Eli> I think the general policy is not to fix those except when
>     Eli> making other changes in the same function, but I will let
>     Eli> others comment.
> 
> Iʼd prefer it if the effort went to determining if eg the alert for
> 'type = 2' below was correct or not, proving the constness of
> variables is what we have a compiler for.
> 
> xterm.c:5346
> 
> 	if (XSCROLL_BAR (bar)->x_window == window_id
>             && FRAME_X_DISPLAY (XFRAME (frame)) == display
> 	    && (type = 2
> 		|| (type == 1 && XSCROLL_BAR (bar)->horizontal)
> 		|| (type == 0 && !XSCROLL_BAR (bar)->horizontal)))
> 	  return XSCROLL_BAR (bar);
> 
> Robert

Well, not everything at once! :) I afraid that if I fix lots of 
warnings in one patch-set, it may get stuck in review because of the 
amount of changes; besides it's easier for my sanity to send small 
patchsets because mailing-list based projects in general tend not to 
accept patches too quickly.

Also note: the constness here is not for compiler but for developers.