On Sat, Aug 17, 2013 at 8:56 PM, Peter N Lewis <[email protected]> wrote:
> Thinking about this further, it would be better done as two separate patches
> in case anyone ever wants to restore the __label__ warning, they can revert
> the second patch. So I would suggest committing the previous patch (which I
> include here for completeness) and then I'll submit a second patch removing
> the __label__ warning. Any other comments?
This LGTM and new warning flag names make sense to me. But please
wait for another LGTM from someone else.
Dmitri
--
main(i,j){for(i=2;;i++){for(j=2;j<i;j++){if(!(i%j)){j=0;break;}}if
(j){printf("%d\n",i);}}} /*Dmitri Gribenko <[email protected]>*/
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits
