Re: [HACKERS] Patches for static check on geo_ops.c

2009-08-27 Thread Paul Matthews
Tom Lane wrote: > I've applied the first three of these changes, but not the last two > (the 'dist' assignments). "clang" seems to have a tin ear for style :-(. > It's failing to notice that we have several similar code blocks in > sequence in these two places, and making the last one different fr

Re: [HACKERS] Patches for static check on geo_ops.c

2009-08-27 Thread Tom Lane
Paul Matthews writes: > Grzegorz Jaskiewicz wonderful static checker coughed up 5 errors in > geo_ops.c. None of them of any particular excitement or of earth > shattering nature. A patch is attached below that should correct these. > (The more little issue we eliminate, the more the large ones w

Re: [HACKERS] Patches for static check on geo_ops.c

2009-08-27 Thread Grzegorz Jaskiewicz
On 27 Aug 2009, at 10:46, Paul Matthews wrote: Grzegorz Jaskiewicz wonderful static checker coughed up 5 errors in geo_ops.c. None of them of any particular excitement or of earth shattering nature. A patch is attached below that should correct these. (The more little issue we eliminate, the

[HACKERS] Patches for static check on geo_ops.c

2009-08-27 Thread Paul Matthews
Grzegorz Jaskiewicz wonderful static checker coughed up 5 errors in geo_ops.c. None of them of any particular excitement or of earth shattering nature. A patch is attached below that should correct these. (The more little issue we eliminate, the more the large ones will stand out.) At line 3131 v