Re: egcs-19980508 warning patches part 1/5

["Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>]

 > From: Jeffrey A Law <law@hurl.cygnus.com>
 > 
 >   In message <199805121406.KAA28401@caip.rutgers.edu>you write:
 >   > 	This is patch part 1/5.  Okay to install?
 >   > 
 >   > Note: I tried to only use ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED where the function call
 >   > interface was mandated by outside constraints.  Also, the ChangeLog
 >   > is for all parts 1 to 4.
 > 
 > 1-4 basically look fine to me.  I probably wouldn't have gone
 > through the trouble of adding all those ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED, but I
 > guess we might as well go ahead use them since you've done the work.

	Installed.

	Regarding the ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED stuff, I'd like to continue
marking unused stuff when, for some reason, its not possible to remove
the unused thing outright.  This helps cut down on the number of
spurious warnings we get.  Too many spurious warnings lead to people
ignoring real warnings.




 >   > 	* cplus-dem.c (squangle_mop_up): Change return type to void.
 >   > 	(internal_cplus_demangle): Remove unused parameter `options'.
 >   > 	All callers changed.
 >   > 	(cplus_demangle_opname): Remove function wide variable `int i' and
 >   >  	replace with `size_t i' at each location where it is used.
 >   > 	(cplus_demangle_opname): change type of `i' from int to size_t.
 > Can you also apply that patch to libiberty.  It also makes one of
 > patches that I haven't checked in redundant :-)  Ahh, I see the
 > libiberty patch in a later part.
 > 
 > I assume we've always got size_t on hosts these days :-)?  I can't
 > remember if this was discussed and dealt with before or not.


	I don't recall reading a size_t discussion.  However, since
the source is already littered with size_t I assume we would have
heard by now if it was a problem. :-) If it becomes an issue for
anyone, we could always put AC_TYPE_SIZE_T in configure.in to handle
it.



 >   > 	* scan-decls.c: Include scan.h.
 > I didn't see an update of Makefile.in dependencies for this one.
 > jeff

	Correct, because for some unknown reason scan-decls.o already
depends on scan.h.  So I deemed a second dependency unnecessary. :-)

		--Kaveh
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi			Project Manager / Custom Development
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu		Icon CMT Corp.