On Mon, Feb 25, 2002 at 11:35:12PM -0700, M. Warner Losh wrote: > In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Mike Makonnen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > : On Mon, 2002-02-25 at 20:59, M. Warner Losh wrote: > : > I've fixed a few of the low hanging fruit, but I don't know how to get > : > rid of warnings like: > : > > : > const char *foo = "blah"; > : > char *baz = foo; > : > > : > when I know they are safe. > : > : Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the correct declaration: > : > : const char foo = "blah"; > : char baz = "foo"; > > You miss the point. First, there's no "" around foo. Second, what I > quoted was boiled down from a bunch of macros and such. Third, the > real example would be > > volatile int conspeed; > int *foo = &conspeed; > > Where foo is only accessed before all other accesses to conspeed.
When it is too twisty to fix at the moment I use macros such as: #define BOGUSLY_CAST_AWAY_VOLATILITY(T,P) ((T)(unsigned int)(P)) ... volatile int conspeed; int *foo = BOGUSLY_CAST_AWAY_VOLATILITY(int *, &conspeed); to surpress the warnings. You can easily redefine the macro to get them back so together with the discouraging name you're not sweeping things under the rug. I don't think there is a GCC attribute to get around this differently. Peter PS - this is a quick example, please no one comment on the size of unsigned int or using gcc typeof instead, etc. -- Peter Dufault ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Realtime development, Machine control, HD Associates, Inc. Fail-Safe systems, Agency approval To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message