On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 09:11 -0500, Alan Conway wrote:
> I'm building with g++ (GCC) 4.3.2 20081105 (Red Hat 4.3.2-7) with no
> problems.
> What does g++ --version tell you?
$ g++ --version
g++ (Ubuntu 4.3.2-1ubuntu11) 4.3.2
Copyright (C) 2008 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is
NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE.
> The (void) cast should tell the compiler that we're ignoring the return value
> deliberately. The risk with your patch is that some other compiler will then
> warn that we have an unused variable.
For gcc at least doing:
int ret;
ret = someFunc();
avoids the unused variable warning, while:
int ret=someFunc();
causes the unused variable warning. Other compilers could be better at
their warning analysis that G++ though.
It seems to me that ideally, the return wouldn't just be written in a
variable, it would also actually be checked, but I didn't take the time
to look at how such errors are usually handled.
Having now reviewed some other portions of the code, am I correct in
thinking that it would be most appropriate to do something like:
if (ret) throw ErrnoException("Cannot write to pipe");
with the actual string in the ErrnoException being adjusted to meet the
circumstance?
If that looks more correct, I'd be happy to adjust the patch.
Thanks for your feedback.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation
Project: http://qpid.apache.org
Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
