On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 5:02 PM, Bill Williams <[email protected]> wrote: > I'll give this one a more detailed look tomorrow. Unused params in temporary > stubs are fine to silence via anonymizing parameters; unused error codes need > good handling. And I'm mostly okay with comparisons that can't fail when > they're making the facts being asserted more legible. > > I really need to check the dead code in context and make sure we're not > missing functionality in a stupid way, too.
Sure, I marked this one as RFC for a reason. I *think* I figured out everything, but it's entirely possible that I missed something. I'd be more than happy to split this up if needed. _______________________________________________ Dyninst-api mailing list [email protected] https://lists.cs.wisc.edu/mailman/listinfo/dyninst-api
