Phil,
I guess you wanted to remove the lines in the Awt2dLibraries.gmk?
Do you think it's worth it to rewrite these assignments as separate
assignment and a condition?
Especially long ones with a lot of parentheses?
Like this one, instead of
if ((j = ((mlib_s32) ((mlib_addr) psrc_row & 4) >> 2))) {
j = (mlib_s32) ((mlib_addr) psrc_row & 4) >> 2;
if (j != 0) {
Also seeing macro calls without a semicolon is weird.
I don't see any need in parentheses in the definition of
FREE_AND_RETURN_STATUS so maybe it's possible to rewrite it without
trailing semicolon?
Thanks,
Vadim
On 29.07.2016 2:31, Philip Race wrote:
Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8074843
Fix: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~prr/8074843/
Here's a sampling of the warnings that I think covers most, maybe all,
of the cases
LINUX
mlib_ImageAffine_NN_Bit.c:87:81: error: suggest parentheses around '-'
in operand of '&' [-Werror=parentheses]
res = (res & ~(1 << bit)) | (((srcPixelPtr[X >> (MLIB_SHIFT +
3)] >> (7 - (X >> MLIB_SHIFT) & 7)) & 1) <<
^
mlib_ImageAffine_NN_Bit.c:153:81: error: suggest parentheses around
'-' in operand of '&' [-Werror=parentheses]
res = (res & ~(1 << bit)) | (((srcPixelPtr[X >> (MLIB_SHIFT +
3)] >> (7 - (X >> MLIB_SHIFT) & 7)) & 1) << bit);
-----------------
mlib_c_ImageCopy.c: In function 'mlib_c_ImageCopy_s16':
mlib_c_ImageCopy.c:439:5: error: suggest parentheses around assignment
used as truth value [-Werror=parentheses]
STRIP(pdst, psrc, src_width, src_height, mlib_u16);
^
-
MAC ...
mlib_c_ImageCopy.c:331:5: error: using the result of an assignment as
a condition without parentheses [-Werror,-Wparentheses]
STRIP(pdst, psrc, src_width, src_height, mlib_u8);
^~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
mlib_c_ImageCopy.c:185:11: note: expanded from macro 'STRIP'
if (j = w & 1) \
~~^~~~~~~
mlib_c_ImageCopy.c:331:5: note: place parentheses around the
assignment to silence this warning\
---
---
SOLARIS
mlib_ImageConv_16ext.c", line 532: statement not reached
(E_STATEMENT_NOT_REACHED)
This last one was not nice just the ";" was considered a statement
after the {XX; YY; return Z} macro expansion
and turning into "do { {....} } while (0)" did not help since
then it said "loop terminator not reached - other cases we have
like this have at least a condition in the macro.
-phil.
