On Fri, 2 Feb 2007, Al Viro wrote:
>
> I'm not sure. __transparent_union__ is an atrocious kludge and it does
> deserve a warning. So getting it to STFU on known offenders we have no
> chance to fix is OK, but legitimizing that abortion is not.
Yeah, it really is pretty nasty. That said, nobody really uses it except
for glibc, and almost nobody is interested in that warning. So we could
have something that just barely parses the thing enough to avoid the
warning at parse type, and then sets a flag: don't check this type on the
caller (so that the _sane_ callers of "wait()" don't get warnings about
the type).
IOW, just a hack to avoid the warning, no real "support" for that horrid
thing.
> Unlike __transparent_union__, restrict is at least a valid C... It's not
> that hard to handle, except for the shortage of bits for modifiers...
At worst, we could parse and ignore it.
Linus
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-sparse" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
