On Tuesday 22 January 2008, Subrata Modak wrote: > Well, i am not of the idea to use direct return(), or, exit() when > returning from a test case, as, tst_exit() was designed to be meant for > that. Infact tst_exit() performs other activities before actually > exiting. And may be we need to look in to the tst_exit() code for any > hidden bugs if at all it has, for which even some issue(s) has been > reported earlier.
i'm pretty sure you're right ... changing tst_exit() to return are not
equivalent and/or appropriate.
> May be we should also have some other ways to avoid this warning(s). May
> be Robert/Mike/Nate/Paul/Ricardo would like to produce their views on
> this.
many other tests simply double it up:
tst_exit()
/* NOT REACHED */
return 0;
if we want to look at doing it right, we should just slap this onto the
tst_exit() prototype in the header file:
__attribute__((__noreturn__))
-mike
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________ Ltp-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ltp-list
