From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Yuri Khan Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.comp.lib.gnulib.bugs Subject: Re: New warnings on emacs-26 branch with gcc 8.2.0 Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2018 14:08:31 +0700 Message-ID: References: <86a7q0ai2z.fsf@gmail.com> <4195986.6xTypejAr3@omega> <83d0uffrft.fsf@gnu.org> <2510628.alnMaqBdeU@omega> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1534662446 22267 195.159.176.226 (19 Aug 2018 07:07:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2018 07:07:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: bug-gnulib@gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii , Paul Eggert , andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, Emacs developers To: bruno@clisp.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 19 09:07:21 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1frHo0-0005fY-Sg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 09:07:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41800 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1frHq7-00071o-4F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 03:09:31 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39027) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1frHpU-00071e-Ke for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 03:08:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1frHpU-0002vq-0I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 03:08:52 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-oi0-x230.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4003:c06::230]:39539) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1frHpR-0002tu-5Y; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 03:08:49 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-oi0-x230.google.com with SMTP id d189-v6so20788931oib.6; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 00:08:46 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=Jw0Z4ijeGKmoDc9olAVFkkN6H9YZyyNYIETbOD8Vqt4=; b=TrCtny0zGD0FQNp83qNzi/msbAnuklIw1fe7Wg5EuKdXA5OeBPeN0+pBLK3lu7iUVn MpQHWHBEr5jXm/qrjI0/ZKLf2yluIMzR4joXll6mE2ZU6oTgdsZ/JyUNeOo8JgTVpnma GsyRgkJR2OS+le8nuh0FgkpT0/k1fdU88yF8WaqW1hoyuzt5CYTttvtOly1WMHREPjwC tFCHpnmnV8/e5pbOK1V/Vofuuj3vgNHDKNkw0+OZLhTavyldodXBrimDwbK9gCz0eXm9 I1OynEfkZQMeA9VYP195Y/jt/Dbz4T9vzg3NInNfrUcQHJYEHWcdK6EC7hcANMWbThLB 26xA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Jw0Z4ijeGKmoDc9olAVFkkN6H9YZyyNYIETbOD8Vqt4=; b=oCl2jlLLPe/RKhKqHrU66luWSHvOhEsM50doTa1ZvIY/ZbCVRIMUmsLdPrT+3x59Ba rJo+u1ORaz/ScqLoddzxxEJ53OleWLJPWx3bJE13Kt0zz9R1N4mJrA9dHM1ciaBgcmNh 0t5uBTqbIVKQhl+SLVjDVXueotyXfA8zG33Vj78foxIIrdg9xDzu1bxCLszDMppJLcwg f1ug6dF1QSlv5nx2GzCmE7uYuY6aAflrWo4miyBkXeAL/DxDl3tm9SFH5VA8s4IzKjM4 28onRrNrXlpUrOOOpsz1N1X2qPlgvBRmai04XihywENGv23anS/E1FHx0/vfB776GA7m n6/w== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFsDbdcfugqo649dp5Ge73HnFQdadbKbbnuBz0nC3J5XvSs3TBG 0pcZwiV1iRbPvbt742xOtK7RfLpEVk6dOAxPVyU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPyZoeD24FSCWOhCrWgldy65/90eUJcG2UGfZyGgVBgPejH3Y1AJQ52zkkC1pUgnyzYiHV4JE8jDGJHlSIPU/BE= X-Received: by 2002:aca:cc0b:: with SMTP id c11-v6mr9633085oig.314.1534662526353; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 00:08:46 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <2510628.alnMaqBdeU@omega> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4003:c06::230 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:228673 gmane.comp.lib.gnulib.bugs:39232 Archived-At: On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 4:26 AM Bruno Haible wrote: > Indeed, casting through (void *) or (void (*) (void)) avoids the > warning. I seem to remember C does not guarantee that pointers to functions must survive casting through void*. It does for casting between function pointer types. So casting through (void (*)(void)) is going to be more portable.