On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:34:39 GMT, Julian Waters <jwat...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> src/jdk.accessibility/windows/native/bridge/AccessBridgeCalls.c line 233:
>>
>>> 231: return TRUE;
>>> 232: }
>>> 233: ((void) error);
>>
>> Not sure why do we need it. I mean there is a value assignment before so why
>> would compiler complain?
>
> The error being cast to void is just there to mark that this was a place that
> the compiler flagged, as for the warning itself, apparently just assigning
> the value is not enough, as that yields a -Wunused-but-set-variable, it has
> to actually be used somehow or explicitly be cast to void to stop the warning
> altogether
This may be useful in a debug build to look up the error if it occurs…
Shall it be removed?
>> src/jdk.accessibility/windows/native/jabswitch/jabswitch.cpp line 326:
>>
>>> 324: int regEnable() {
>>> 325: HKEY hKey;
>>> 326: // DWORD retval = -1;
>>
>> I don't think we need to comment out both retval and freeData. It is either
>> remnants of the code that was long gone or (more likely) were just a copy of
>> another template method that actually uses these variables. If variables are
>> not used within the function i would just delete them.
>
> Will do, thanks
I agree `retval` was probably used as a return value of the function; now there
are explicit `return` statements.
-------------
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21656#discussion_r1924377383
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/21656#discussion_r1923754007
