Quoth David Edmondson on Jan 19 at 7:23 am:
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:40:11 -0500, Austin Clements
> wrote:
> > +/* See handle_sigint in notmuch-new.c for the justification for
> > + * ignoring write's result. */
> > +IGNORE_RESULT (write (2, msg, sizeof(msg)-1));
>
> Just include
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:40:11 -0500, Austin Clements wrote:
> +/* See handle_sigint in notmuch-new.c for the justification for
> + * ignoring write's result. */
> +IGNORE_RESULT (write (2, msg, sizeof(msg)-1));
Just include the comment in both places. Someone will work over the code
Quoth David Edmondson on Jan 19 at 7:23 am:
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:40:11 -0500, Austin Clements amdra...@mit.edu wrote:
+/* See handle_sigint in notmuch-new.c for the justification for
+ * ignoring write's result. */
+IGNORE_RESULT (write (2, msg, sizeof(msg)-1));
Just
This ignores the results of the two writes in sigint handlers even
harder than before.
While my libc lacks the declarations that trigger these warnings, this
can be tested by adding the following to notmuch.h:
__attribute__((warn_unused_result))
ssize_t write(int fd, const void *buf, size_t
This ignores the results of the two writes in sigint handlers even
harder than before.
While my libc lacks the declarations that trigger these warnings, this
can be tested by adding the following to notmuch.h:
__attribute__((warn_unused_result))
ssize_t write(int fd, const void *buf, size_t
On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 19:40:11 -0500, Austin Clements amdra...@mit.edu wrote:
+/* See handle_sigint in notmuch-new.c for the justification for
+ * ignoring write's result. */
+IGNORE_RESULT (write (2, msg, sizeof(msg)-1));
Just include the comment in both places. Someone will work
