From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 06:14:43 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Revert "make error()'s constant return value more visible"
Message-ID: <53672c53f2ed9_2e86acd30c6e@nysa.notmuch>
In-Reply-To: <20140505060202.GA27360@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King wrote:
> On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 12:45:30AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> 
> > Jeff King wrote:
> > > On Sun, May 04, 2014 at 01:12:53AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> > > 
> > > > So it looks like gcc is smarter now, and in trying to fix a few warnings
> > > > we generated hundreds more.
> > > > 
> > > > This reverts commit e208f9cc7574f5980faba498d0aa30b4defeb34f.
> > > 
> > > And now we've gone the other way, and re-enabled the initial warnings.
> > > Can we come up with a solution that helps both cases?
> > 
> > What initial warnings? As I explained already I don't get any warnings
> > with this patch series in gcc 4.9.0.
> 
> The "few warnings" in your statement quoted above.
> 
> You could try reading the commit message of the commit you are
> reverting, which explains it, but the short answer is: try compiling
> with -O3.

Sigh. And I'm the one with the abrasive style of communication.

-- 
Felipe Contreras