On Friday 29 October 2004 16:27, Adrian Bunk wrote: > On Fri, Oct 29, 2004 at 04:17:30PM -0700, David Brownell wrote:
> > p.s. Last I looked, GCC ignored unused inlines; no code > > generated, no warnings. Did that change? > >... > > It didn't change. > > But there are three different possible reactions on my patches: > 1. ACK, kill this dead code > 2. ups, I really wanted to use this function > 3. please keep, code using this function will/might follow in the future > > Case 1 is the most common case (and this simply removes some dead code). > > I had until now two times case 2 (which means the code is now better). > > You are the first person for case 3. And presumably there will also be at least a few case 4: 4. no response, treated as an ACK. :) ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Sybase ASE Linux Express Edition - download now for FREE LinuxWorld Reader's Choice Award Winner for best database on Linux. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=5588&alloc_id=12065&op=click _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
