On 17 February 2011 08:30, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
In file included from gram.y:12758:
scan.c: In function ‘yy_try_NUL_trans’:
scan.c:16256: warning: unused variable ‘yyg’
Lots of people have reported that one. It's been around since August
of last year, if not earlier.
--
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 14:37 +, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On 17 February 2011 08:30, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
In file included from gram.y:12758:
scan.c: In function ‘yy_try_NUL_trans’:
scan.c:16256: warning: unused variable ‘yyg’
Lots of people have reported that one.
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 14:37 +, Peter Geoghegan wrote:
On 17 February 2011 08:30, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
In file included from gram.y:12758:
scan.c: In function ‘yy_try_NUL_trans’:
scan.c:16256:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 00:53 +, Tom Lane wrote:
Doesn't anybody around here pay attention to compiler warnings?
If you see one, then I accept one was there. I didn't see one, and a
full make distclean and re-compile doesn't show a compiler warning
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 10:09 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 00:53 +, Tom Lane wrote:
Doesn't anybody around here pay attention to compiler warnings?
If you see one, then I accept one was there. I didn't see one, and a
full make
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
It might be worth trying to clean up those warn_unused_result
things, if other people are seeing those.
In `make world` I'm seeing:
scan.c: In function *yy_try_NUL_trans*:
scan.c:16256: warning: unused variable *yyg*
--
elog.c: In function
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
It might be worth trying to clean up those warn_unused_result
things, if other people are seeing those.
elog.c: In function *write_console*:
elog.c:1708: warning: ignoring return value of *write*, declared
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Would you check whether just casting the function result to (void)
shuts it up?
Casting the result to (void) didn't change the warning. It shut up
when I declared a local variable and assigned the value to it (which
was then never used).
-Kevin
--
Sent
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
In at least some of these cases, I think ignoring the write()
result is intentional, because there's really nothing useful we
can do about it if it fails (oh, you wish we'd log a failure to
write to the log?).
I know that in Java you can get a positive
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Tom Lane t...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Would you check whether just casting the function result to (void)
shuts it up?
Casting the result to (void) didn't change the warning. It shut up
when I declared a local variable and assigned the value
Kevin Grittner kevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
I know that in Java you can get a positive number less than the full
size as an indication that part of the block was written, and you
must loop to write until you get all of it written (or get an error
return). At this page, it appears that
On 02/17/2011 12:19 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
Kevin Grittnerkevin.gritt...@wicourts.gov writes:
Tom Lanet...@sss.pgh.pa.us wrote:
Would you check whether just casting the function result to (void)
shuts it up?
Casting the result to (void) didn't change the warning. It shut up
when I declared
Andrew Dunstan and...@dunslane.net wrote:
Ugh. Isn't there some sort of pragma or similar we can use to shut
it up?
If that fails, maybe use some function like the below? That would
also have the advantage of not relying on assumptions beyond the
documented API, which I tend to feel good
On 02/17/2011 12:54 PM, Kevin Grittner wrote:
Andrew Dunstanand...@dunslane.net wrote:
Ugh. Isn't there some sort of pragma or similar we can use to shut
it up?
If that fails, maybe use some function like the below? That would
also have the advantage of not relying on assumptions beyond
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 10:09 -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com writes:
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 00:53 +, Tom Lane wrote:
Doesn't anybody around here pay attention to compiler warnings?
If you see one, then I accept one was there. I didn't see one, and a
full make
On Thu, Feb 17, 2011 at 3:47 PM, Simon Riggs si...@2ndquadrant.com wrote:
The only difference in messages I got was
dbsize.c: In function ‘pg_relation_filepath’:
dbsize.c:570: warning: ‘rnode.dbNode’ may be used uninitialized in this
function
dbsize.c:570: warning: ‘rnode.spcNode’ may be
16 matches
Mail list logo
