This is the mail archive of the gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: A patch to constify gcc.c (Really, summarizing remaining warnings)


On Fri, 19 Mar 1999 01:47:57 -0700, Jeffrey A Law wrote:
>
>  In message <199903111725.MAA08997@blastula.phys.columbia.edu>you write:
>  > 
>  > For the *_unlocked functions, what do you think of this patch (which I
>  > am testing as we speak)?
>  > 
>  > 1999-03-11 12:23 -0500  Zack Weinberg  <zack@rabi.phys.columbia.edu>
>  > 
>  > 	* system.h: Use putc_unlocked, fputc_unlocked, and
>  > 	fputs_unlocked only if putc_unlocked has a prototype already.
>  > 	Prototype fputs_unlocked if necessary.
>  > 	* configure.in: Check for prototypes of putc_unlocked and
>  > 	fputs_unlocked. 
>  > 	* acconfig.h: Updated.
>  > 
>
>  > +# ifdef NEED_DECLARATION_FPUTS_UNLOCKED
>  > +extern int fputs_unlocked PROTO ((const char *, FILE *));
>  >  #endif
>You're missing an #endif here.

Right.  Was fixed in my tree, but I didn't think it was worth
resending over.

>The comment should more clearly indicate what NEED_DECLARATION_PUTC_UNLOCKED
>actually means since it is non-obvious.

Good point.

>Considering your system is dead, I went ahead and made those changes and
>installed the patch.

Thanks.

zw


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]