At this point, I think we have no real option but to change the coding
standard to match the code as-is.
On 1/2/2020 8:27 PM, Gregory Nutt wrote:
What is the reason for the recent commits to nuttx and apps that removed
the (void) for ignored return values in thousands of places?
It is also a coding style issue because the coding style requires
(void) if you choose to ignore the return value from a function
http://nuttx.org/Documentation/NuttXCCodingStandard.html#retvalues
*Checking Return Values*. Callers of internal OS functions should
always check return values for an error. At a minimum, a debug
statement should indicate that an error has occurred. */The calling
logic intentionally ignores the returned value, then the function
return value should be explicitly cast to (void) to indicate that the
return value is intentionally ignored./* An exception of for standard
functions for which people have historically ignored the returned
values, such as printf() or close. All calls to malloc or realloc must
be checked for failures to allocate memory.
