threads / patch / 30526

patchbuiltin/blame.c: Fix a "Using plain integer as NULL pointer" warning

Subject: [PATCH] builtin/blame.c: Fix a "Using plain integer as NULL pointer" warning

## tl;dr

3 messages between May 13, 2012 and May 15, 2012. Diffs are folded; open one to read it.

replies: 2people: 2as markdown or json

Ramsay Jones· May 13, 2012, 21:41 UTC · lore

Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones <ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
---

Hi Junio,

I try to catch these warnings, while the topics are still in the pu branch, so that we can squash the fix into them before they hit next. I don't know how I missed this one (commit 4b4132f, "blame: factor out helper for calling xdi_diff()", 09-05-2012) which was part of the 'rs/xdiff-lose-emit-func' branch.

Sorry about that.

ATB, Ramsay Jones

 builtin/blame.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

Show changes to builtin/blame.c +1 −1

diff --git a/builtin/blame.c b/builtin/blame.c
index 778d661..24d3dd5 100644
--- a/builtin/blame.c
+++ b/builtin/blame.c
@@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ static int diff_hunks(mmfile_t *file_a, mmfile_t *file_b, long ctxlen,
 {
 	xpparam_t xpp = {0};
 	xdemitconf_t xecfg = {0};
-	xdemitcb_t ecb = {0};
+	xdemitcb_t ecb = {NULL};
 
 	xpp.flags = xdl_opts;
 	xecfg.ctxlen = ctxlen;

-- 
1.7.10

René Scharfe· May 13, 2012, 23:39 UTC · re: Ramsay Jones · lore

Re: [PATCH] builtin/blame.c: Fix a "Using plain integer as NULL pointer" warning

Am 13.05.2012 23:41, schrieb Ramsay Jones:

Show 35 quoted lines

>
>
> Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones<ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
> ---
>
> Hi Junio,
>
> I try to catch these warnings, while the topics are still in the
> pu branch, so that we can squash the fix into them before they
> hit next. I don't know how I missed this one (commit 4b4132f,
> "blame: factor out helper for calling xdi_diff()", 09-05-2012)
> which was part of the 'rs/xdiff-lose-emit-func' branch.
>
> Sorry about that.
>
> ATB,
> Ramsay Jones
>
>
>   builtin/blame.c |    2 +-
>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/blame.c b/builtin/blame.c
> index 778d661..24d3dd5 100644
> --- a/builtin/blame.c
> +++ b/builtin/blame.c
> @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ static int diff_hunks(mmfile_t *file_a, mmfile_t *file_b, long ctxlen,
>   {
>   	xpparam_t xpp = {0};
>   	xdemitconf_t xecfg = {0};
> -	xdemitcb_t ecb = {0};
> +	xdemitcb_t ecb = {NULL};
>
>   	xpp.flags = xdl_opts;
>   	xecfg.ctxlen = ctxlen;

The warning is given by sparse, not a C compiler, correct? It's probably worth shutting it up by making that change; my excuse for using {0} is that it is such a nice and portable idiom [1] for initializing any structure, however.

René

[1] http://www.ex-parrot.com/~chris/random/initialise.html

Ramsay Jones· May 15, 2012, 17:33 UTC · re: René Scharfe · lore

Re: [PATCH] builtin/blame.c: Fix a "Using plain integer as NULL pointer" warning

René Scharfe wrote:

Show 40 quoted lines

> Am 13.05.2012 23:41, schrieb Ramsay Jones:
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Ramsay Jones<ramsay@ramsay1.demon.co.uk>
>> ---
>>
>> Hi Junio,
>>
>> I try to catch these warnings, while the topics are still in the
>> pu branch, so that we can squash the fix into them before they
>> hit next. I don't know how I missed this one (commit 4b4132f,
>> "blame: factor out helper for calling xdi_diff()", 09-05-2012)
>> which was part of the 'rs/xdiff-lose-emit-func' branch.
>>
>> Sorry about that.
>>
>> ATB,
>> Ramsay Jones
>>
>>
>>   builtin/blame.c |    2 +-
>>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/builtin/blame.c b/builtin/blame.c
>> index 778d661..24d3dd5 100644
>> --- a/builtin/blame.c
>> +++ b/builtin/blame.c
>> @@ -93,7 +93,7 @@ static int diff_hunks(mmfile_t *file_a, mmfile_t *file_b, long ctxlen,
>>   {
>>   	xpparam_t xpp = {0};
>>   	xdemitconf_t xecfg = {0};
>> -	xdemitcb_t ecb = {0};
>> +	xdemitcb_t ecb = {NULL};
>>
>>   	xpp.flags = xdl_opts;
>>   	xecfg.ctxlen = ctxlen;
> 
> The warning is given by sparse, not a C compiler, correct?  It's 
> probably worth shutting it up by making that change; my excuse for using 
> {0} is that it is such a nice and portable idiom [1] for initializing 
> any structure, however.

Yes, sorry, it is indeed a sparse warning. (The original subject line mentioned sparse, but it was too long ... ;-)

Thanks!

ATB, Ramsay Jones