On 2017-05-05 17:29:22 +1000, William Hales wrote: > This is his message, copied and pasted: > > > Hi Vincent, > > > > return 666; works equally well as it should not be called by ARM backend. > > > > This is a workaround to remove warning.
But this can hide bugs, e.g. if in the future this function is called by the ARM backend. It would be better either not to define this function at all (best solution at it doesn't make sense on the ARM, and issues would be detected at compile time) or have something like an assert to abort if this function is called. > Hopefully this email will not suffer the same problem. Vincent: what mail > client are you using? Mutt. I choose to display the text/plain part by default (thus not needing an HTML parser, with potential security issues). -- Vincent Lefèvre <vinc...@vinc17.net> - Web: <https://www.vinc17.net/> 100% accessible validated (X)HTML - Blog: <https://www.vinc17.net/blog/> Work: CR INRIA - computer arithmetic / AriC project (LIP, ENS-Lyon) _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list Tinycc-devel@nongnu.org https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
