From: Felipe Contreras Date: Mon, 05 May 2014 07:30:12 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] Revert "make error()'s constant return value more visible" Message-ID: <53673e0499ebe_78fd70f2ecb5@nysa.notmuch> In-Reply-To: <20140505062931.GA9311@sigill.intra.peff.net> Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, May 05, 2014 at 01:14:43AM -0500, Felipe Contreras wrote: > > Jeff King wrote: > > > 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. > > I apologize if that seemed abrasive. I am slightly annoyed that you > seemed to be reverting my commit without understanding (or dealing with) > the problem that the original fixed. The original problem happens only with -O3, I tried only with -O2 and didn't see any problems. If we have a) code that fixes a couple warnings with -O3 but introduces hundreds with -O2, vs. b) code that has only a comple warnings with -O3, I'd go for b) any day. > But I was _also_ trying to point you in the right direction by directing > you to -O3. Do you see the problem now? And did you look at the > follow-up patch I sent? Yes, I see the problem now with -O3. And yes, I looked at the patch you sent. I haven't tested it but I bet it would sove both problems. Cheers. -- Felipe Contreras