* compilation warnings @ 2003-07-04 4:36 Paul Jarc 2003-07-27 16:56 ` Marius Vollmer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Paul Jarc @ 2003-07-04 4:36 UTC (permalink / raw) If I use the "-Wwrite-strings -Wshadow" options for gcc while compiling an extension, I get some warnings that I think could be silenced: .../smob.h:149: warning: declaration of `free' shadows a global declaration .../smob.h:170: warning: declaration of `free' shadows a global declaration .../smob.h:176: warning: declaration of `free' shadows a global declaration .../ports.h:233: warning: declaration of `free' shadows a global declaration .../numbers.h:258: warning: declaration of `div' shadows a global declaration .../libguile-ldap.c:169: warning: passing arg 1 of `scm_make_smob_type' discards qualifiers from pointer target type Is there some reason why scm_make_smob_type's first argument is char* instead of char const*? Should I submit a patch to silence these warnings? paul _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: compilation warnings 2003-07-04 4:36 compilation warnings Paul Jarc @ 2003-07-27 16:56 ` Marius Vollmer 2003-07-28 22:37 ` Kevin Ryde 2003-09-22 21:58 ` Paul Jarc 0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Marius Vollmer @ 2003-07-27 16:56 UTC (permalink / raw) prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes: > If I use the "-Wwrite-strings -Wshadow" options for gcc while > compiling an extension, I get some warnings that I think could be > silenced: > > .../smob.h:149: warning: declaration of `free' shadows a global declaration > .../smob.h:170: warning: declaration of `free' shadows a global declaration > .../smob.h:176: warning: declaration of `free' shadows a global declaration > .../ports.h:233: warning: declaration of `free' shadows a global declaration > .../numbers.h:258: warning: declaration of `div' shadows a global declaration > .../libguile-ldap.c:169: warning: passing arg 1 of `scm_make_smob_type' discards qualifiers from pointer target type > > Is there some reason why scm_make_smob_type's first argument is char* > instead of char const*? Should I submit a patch to silence these > warnings? Yes, please do. The shadow warnings seem annoying, but since there are so few, we can just as well fix them. I don't think using a global name as a parameter name in a prototype can ever hurt... -- GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405 _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: compilation warnings 2003-07-27 16:56 ` Marius Vollmer @ 2003-07-28 22:37 ` Kevin Ryde 2003-09-22 21:58 ` Paul Jarc 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Kevin Ryde @ 2003-07-28 22:37 UTC (permalink / raw) Marius Vollmer <mvo@zagadka.de> writes: > > Yes, please do. The shadow warnings seem annoying, but since there > are so few, we can just as well fix them. I don't think using a > global name as a parameter name in a prototype can ever hurt... It's a good idea to omit parameter names from prototypes entirely, so there's no chance of conflicting with an application #define. Not that a sensible application would be making macros out of common lower-case names, but just for namespace cleanliness. Of course the same can't be done for structure fields, unfortunately. _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: compilation warnings 2003-07-27 16:56 ` Marius Vollmer 2003-07-28 22:37 ` Kevin Ryde @ 2003-09-22 21:58 ` Paul Jarc 2003-09-23 4:22 ` Rob Browning 2003-10-07 16:00 ` Marius Vollmer 1 sibling, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Paul Jarc @ 2003-09-22 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw) [-- Attachment #1: Type: TEXT/PLAIN, Size: 460 bytes --] Here's a patch to silence some warnings produced by -Wwrite-strings. (I only used -Wwrite-strings while compiling a Guile extension, not Guile itself. Using -Wwrite-strings for Guile itself would likely produce lots more similar warnings, but none of them should be too hard to fix.) * goops.c, objects.h, smob.c, smob.h: Make type names char const * instead of char *. BTW, what version of auto* should be used to build/test CVS checkouts? paul [-- Attachment #2: guile-const.patch --] [-- Type: text/x-patch, Size: 2535 bytes --] Index: libguile/goops.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/guile/guile/guile-core/libguile/goops.c,v retrieving revision 1.71 diff -u -r1.71 goops.c --- libguile/goops.c 18 Sep 2003 20:55:40 -0000 1.71 +++ libguile/goops.c 22 Sep 2003 21:48:05 -0000 @@ -2435,7 +2435,7 @@ **********************************************************************/ static SCM -make_class_from_template (char *template, char *type_name, SCM supers, int applicablep) +make_class_from_template (char const *template, char const *type_name, SCM supers, int applicablep) { SCM class, name; if (type_name) @@ -2462,7 +2462,7 @@ } SCM -scm_make_extended_class (char *type_name, int applicablep) +scm_make_extended_class (char const *type_name, int applicablep) { return make_class_from_template ("<%s>", type_name, Index: libguile/objects.h =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/guile/guile/guile-core/libguile/objects.h,v retrieving revision 1.41 diff -u -r1.41 objects.h --- libguile/objects.h 5 Apr 2003 19:10:22 -0000 1.41 +++ libguile/objects.h 22 Sep 2003 21:48:05 -0000 @@ -197,7 +197,7 @@ SCM_API SCM scm_no_applicable_method; /* Goops functions. */ -SCM_API SCM scm_make_extended_class (char *type_name, int applicablep); +SCM_API SCM scm_make_extended_class (char const *type_name, int applicablep); SCM_API void scm_i_inherit_applicable (SCM c); SCM_API void scm_make_port_classes (long ptobnum, char *type_name); SCM_API void scm_change_object_class (SCM, SCM, SCM); Index: libguile/smob.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/guile/guile/guile-core/libguile/smob.c,v retrieving revision 1.58 diff -u -r1.58 smob.c --- libguile/smob.c 18 Sep 2003 20:55:40 -0000 1.58 +++ libguile/smob.c 22 Sep 2003 21:48:05 -0000 @@ -269,7 +269,7 @@ \f scm_t_bits -scm_make_smob_type (char *name, size_t size) +scm_make_smob_type (char const *name, size_t size) #define FUNC_NAME "scm_make_smob_type" { long new_smob; Index: libguile/smob.h =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/guile/guile/guile-core/libguile/smob.h,v retrieving revision 1.48 diff -u -r1.48 smob.h --- libguile/smob.h 5 Apr 2003 19:10:22 -0000 1.48 +++ libguile/smob.h 22 Sep 2003 21:48:05 -0000 @@ -30,7 +30,7 @@ typedef struct scm_smob_descriptor { - char *name; + char const *name; size_t size; SCM (*mark) (SCM); size_t (*free) (SCM); [-- Attachment #3: Type: text/plain, Size: 142 bytes --] _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: compilation warnings 2003-09-22 21:58 ` Paul Jarc @ 2003-09-23 4:22 ` Rob Browning 2003-09-23 16:19 ` Paul Jarc 2003-10-07 16:00 ` Marius Vollmer 1 sibling, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Rob Browning @ 2003-09-23 4:22 UTC (permalink / raw) prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes: > * goops.c, objects.h, smob.c, smob.h: Make type names char > const * instead of char *. > > BTW, what version of auto* should be used to build/test CVS checkouts? The general rule of thumb is, for HEAD, the most recent stable versions. -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4 _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: compilation warnings 2003-09-23 4:22 ` Rob Browning @ 2003-09-23 16:19 ` Paul Jarc 2003-09-24 6:11 ` Rob Browning 0 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread From: Paul Jarc @ 2003-09-23 16:19 UTC (permalink / raw) Rob Browning <rlb@defaultvalue.org> wrote: > prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes: >> BTW, what version of auto* should be used to build/test CVS checkouts? > > The general rule of thumb is, for HEAD, the most recent stable > versions. That's not especially useful advice, though. After a new autoconf release, Guile won't be updated instantly; it'll take some time. Maybe a significant amount of time in pathological cases, but in any case, how will we know? Also, which tools do we need? Guile has its own libtool, right? So just autoconf and automake? paul _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: compilation warnings 2003-09-23 16:19 ` Paul Jarc @ 2003-09-24 6:11 ` Rob Browning 0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Rob Browning @ 2003-09-24 6:11 UTC (permalink / raw) prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes: > That's not especially useful advice, though. After a new autoconf > release, Guile won't be updated instantly; it'll take some time. > Maybe a significant amount of time in pathological cases, but in any > case, how will we know? Depends on what you mean. Distribution .tar.gzs (of course) aren't supposed to require any of the autotools, but if you're building from CVS, then we reserve the right to require the latest versions. However, at any given time, we probably only require some fairly recent version. Right now I'm using automake 1.7.7 and autoconf 2.57. so whenever I'm working on unstable, I'll be making sure we're compatible with that. (Just tested an ./autogen.sh on unstable, and it seems OK...) If you mean how would someone who wants to work on a 1.6.X tarfile know which autotools to use, then that's tougher. Right now we just supply a list of versions known not to work in HACKING. Ideally, they'd just be able to use the latest tools as well. Frankly, I'd consider a failure to build using the latest autotools important enough to warrant a stable point release. > Also, which tools do we need? Guile has its own libtool, right? So > just autoconf and automake? You actually do need autoconf, automake, and libtool. We have our own version of ltdl, but you'll still need libtool for all the rest: compilation, etc. (or more specifically, so ./autogen.sh can run libtoolize). -- Rob Browning rlb @defaultvalue.org and @debian.org; previously @cs.utexas.edu GPG starting 2002-11-03 = 14DD 432F AE39 534D B592 F9A0 25C8 D377 8C7E 73A4 _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
* Re: compilation warnings 2003-09-22 21:58 ` Paul Jarc 2003-09-23 4:22 ` Rob Browning @ 2003-10-07 16:00 ` Marius Vollmer 1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread From: Marius Vollmer @ 2003-10-07 16:00 UTC (permalink / raw) prj@po.cwru.edu (Paul Jarc) writes: > Here's a patch to silence some warnings produced by -Wwrite-strings. Applied, thanks! -- GPG: D5D4E405 - 2F9B BCCC 8527 692A 04E3 331E FAF8 226A D5D4 E405 _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2003-10-07 16:00 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2003-07-04 4:36 compilation warnings Paul Jarc 2003-07-27 16:56 ` Marius Vollmer 2003-07-28 22:37 ` Kevin Ryde 2003-09-22 21:58 ` Paul Jarc 2003-09-23 4:22 ` Rob Browning 2003-09-23 16:19 ` Paul Jarc 2003-09-24 6:11 ` Rob Browning 2003-10-07 16:00 ` Marius Vollmer
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox; as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).