[Greg Ward] > ... > Also, if there are warnings we're not going to worry about (eg. > incorrect "might be used uninitialized"), lemme know. If a compiler is afraid something might be uninitialized, the code is too clever for people to be sure it's correct at a glance too. Note that right before 2.0 was released, a bogus "uninitalized" msg got repaired, which turned up a *legitimate* "uninitialized" msg that the bogus msg was covering up. The effort needed to fix one of these is too minor to be worth even considering not fixing. I'm not sure what gcc is complaining about in many of the cases; others are quite clear (e.g., "confstr" apparently has no prototype in scope by the time it's called in posixmodule.c, and that is indeed not good). unix-should-be-shot-not-that-windows-shouldn't-ly y'rs - tim
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4