linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH][au1000] Remove useless EXTRA_CFLAGS

To: Florian Fainelli <florian.fainelli@telecomint.eu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH][au1000] Remove useless EXTRA_CFLAGS
From: Manuel Lauss <manuel.lauss@googlemail.com>
Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2007 22:09:57 +0200
Cc: Manuel Lauss <manuel.lauss@googlemail.com>, linux-mips@linux-mips.org
Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:from; bh=IEE6JY6gsW55CnJ34ht8TkslwcKImZpMtPjVcNTVbMI=; b=BmnN2uLXPjPGahAtxOsawRI7gTgTEpmC0bZszq3JSIiPCxdL9vE5c7tO1ELYoLE+fluHnT6cZ0v0dUxkoRLNzq7FtuqVSSr0hVIgeCWMP0lLUIf6VvwF5AifWmHpu03qcyDYRJudnnwNjzWkqwxH3otjL3SYPbt05beCosT97mc=
Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:from; b=QVHVWWABnL+fXPB8md9bLvMhbyB7lQ6EwtyOmN3/mbtbxyyqErJKe2moUQNI2lsTlmGAja1TuoVJlWadso8ayoWNI6WY7XtxJHKdE8Cyg4jt6M//WXcfHL7dVWpKtwZ0bJPHlWpAKzhvlyT2BSpD8lDpuXU5CAyHGVZGY4AnjI8=
In-reply-to: <200710252135.08423.florian.fainelli@telecomint.eu>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <200710252108.43357.florian.fainelli@telecomint.eu> <4720ED96.2090909@gmail.com> <200710252135.08423.florian.fainelli@telecomint.eu>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
User-agent: Thunderbird/1.0 Mnenhy/0.7
Florian Fainelli schrieb:
Le jeudi 25 octobre 2007, Manuel Lauss a écrit :
then where's the harm in leaving it in? It only forces you to think twice
(or apply tons of casts) when working with the au1x code.

II could argue the same way, why not :p ?

Hehe ;)

If your code has warning, you are very likely not to like the compiler stop on it, but rather warn. Also if there are casts or any special conversion, sparse checking will do a better job as far as I can tell.


I tripped over it once or twice; but in the end I don't really whether
this stays or goes (not that it matters anyway)

Thanks,
        Manuel Lauss

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>