On 18/09/14 06:56, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 12:54 AM, Luca Barbato <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 18/09/14 06:36, Reinhard Tartler wrote:
>>> What would be a better reporting mechanism in this case?
>>
>> Options:
>>
>> (void) cast to make apparent we do not care about the value
>>
>> pass the context to avpriv_open and use av_streerror to report _why_ it
>> failed.
>>
>> and whatever would make this call fail would make the open above fail as
>> well.
>>
>> Courmish, which system does support FD_CLOEXEC and does not support
>> O_CLOEXEC ?
>>
>> I'd drop that additional syscall and just use the O_ option.
>>
>> Making coverity happy is nice, but I'd like to take the reports as a
>> mean to improve not just by its statistics.
> 
> sure, feel free to take over this patch then.

Probably I can add (void) casts everywhere it is needed in a single
patch, before I spend time on that, is anybody against that? The other
viable option is suppress such reports as they come.

Why do:
- make coverity happier
- make compilers reporting it happier

Why not:
- it adds 6 chars
- it is mainly noise.

lu
_______________________________________________
libav-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel

Reply via email to