From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 5095 invoked by alias); 7 Jan 2015 04:14:09 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 4970 invoked by uid 89); 7 Jan 2015 04:13:59 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: rock.gnat.com Received: from rock.gnat.com (HELO rock.gnat.com) (205.232.38.15) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with (AES256-SHA encrypted) ESMTPS; Wed, 07 Jan 2015 04:13:58 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by filtered-rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 53F981164AA; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 23:13:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from rock.gnat.com ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (rock.gnat.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 4QEiVO5jzH2C; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 23:13:56 -0500 (EST) Received: from joel.gnat.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by rock.gnat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DD12211649C; Tue, 6 Jan 2015 23:13:55 -0500 (EST) Received: by joel.gnat.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D5C9B4100E; Wed, 7 Jan 2015 08:13:51 +0400 (RET) Date: Wed, 07 Jan 2015 04:14:00 -0000 From: Joel Brobecker To: Steve Ellcey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [Patch] Fix build problem with system call in compile/compile.c Message-ID: <20150107041351.GN5445@adacore.com> References: <20150106041615.GJ5445@adacore.com> <1420560255.15691.21.camel@ubuntu-sellcey> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1420560255.15691.21.camel@ubuntu-sellcey> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-SW-Source: 2015-01/txt/msg00091.txt.bz2 > > Does it work to cast the result of the call to system to (void) > > instead? In your case, I fear that you'd be exchanging one warning > > (return value being ignored) by another (value assigned but never > > used). > > No, I tried using "(void) system (zap);" instead of "i = system (zap);" > and I still got the warning message. In that case, I have no objection to your patch either, provided a small comment is added to explain why we allow ourselves to ignore the return value (and since you'll be touching that code anyways, I would also rename your variable to something more explicit, such as "ignored" or "unused" for instance). Thank you, -- Joel