[PATCH 0/3] MSVC fixes
Hi,
I've 3 patches fixing warnings and errors when compiling with latest MSVC (2012).
-- Best regards, Sven Strickroth PGP key id F5A9D4C4 @ any key-server
threads / patch / 33757
patch, 3 partspoll.h lies in the same folder, so use normal quotes for include
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] poll.h lies in the same folder, so use normal quotes for include
Some compilers, like Visual C++ complain when <> is used instead of double quotes for non system includes.
Signed-off-by: Sven Strickroth <email@cs-ware.de> --- compat/poll/poll.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Show changes to compat/poll/poll.c +1 −1
diff --git a/compat/poll/poll.c b/compat/poll/poll.c index 7d226ec..b85386a 100644 --- a/compat/poll/poll.c +++ b/compat/poll/poll.c @@ -31,7 +31,7 @@ #include <sys/types.h> /* Specification. */ -#include <poll.h> +#include "poll.h" #include <errno.h> #include <limits.h>
-- Best regards, Sven Strickroth PGP key id F5A9D4C4 @ any key-server
Re: [PATCH 1/3] poll.h lies in the same folder, so use normal quotes for include
Am 09.05.2013 03:12 schrieb Sven Strickroth:
> Some compilers, like Visual C++ complain when <> is used instead of > double quotes for non system includes.
I just noticed that this patch isn't necessary for 1.8.3 (since 41f2999180f5a58f2a4214d896359c1587c9024f) any more. Sorry for the noise - I was still building against 1.8.2.2.
-- Best regards, Sven Strickroth PGP key id F5A9D4C4 @ any key-server
[PATCH 2/3] mingw.h: Define only if necessary
Since the latest version of MSVC EWOULDBLOCK, EAFNOSUPPORT and ECONNABORTED are defined in errno.h. When used with MSVC mingw.h is included from msvc.h and causes warnings about redefinitions.
Signed-off-by: Sven Strickroth <email@cs-ware.de> --- compat/mingw.h | 6 ++++++ 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
Show changes to compat/mingw.h +6 −0
diff --git a/compat/mingw.h b/compat/mingw.h index 685cd2c..c424333 100644 --- a/compat/mingw.h +++ b/compat/mingw.h @@ -32,7 +32,9 @@ typedef int socklen_t; #define WEXITSTATUS(x) ((x) & 0xff) #define WTERMSIG(x) SIGTERM +#ifndef EWOULDBLOCK #define EWOULDBLOCK EAGAIN +#endif #define SHUT_WR SD_SEND #define SIGHUP 1 @@ -46,8 +48,12 @@ typedef int socklen_t; #define F_SETFD 2 #define FD_CLOEXEC 0x1 +#ifndef EAFNOSUPPORT #define EAFNOSUPPORT WSAEAFNOSUPPORT +#endif +#ifndef ECONNABORTED #define ECONNABORTED WSAECONNABORTED +#endif struct passwd { char *pw_name;
-- Best regards, Sven Strickroth PGP key id F5A9D4C4 @ any key-server
[PATCH 3/3] Initialize variables with values
With MSVC initializing a variable with "int a=a" causes a warning about using an uninitialized value.
Signed-off-by: Sven Strickroth <email@cs-ware.de> --- builtin/rev-list.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
Show changes to builtin/rev-list.c +1 −1
diff --git a/builtin/rev-list.c b/builtin/rev-list.c index 67701be..13afacd 100644 --- a/builtin/rev-list.c +++ b/builtin/rev-list.c @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ int cmd_rev_list(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix) mark_edges_uninteresting(revs.commits, &revs, show_edge); if (bisect_list) { - int reaches = reaches, all = all; + int reaches = 0, all = 0; revs.commits = find_bisection(revs.commits, &reaches, &all, bisect_find_all);
-- Best regards, Sven Strickroth PGP key id F5A9D4C4 @ any key-server
Re: [PATCH 3/3] Initialize variables with values
On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 03:13:39AM +0200, Sven Strickroth wrote:
Show 21 quoted lines
> With MSVC initializing a variable with "int a=a" causes a warning about
> using an uninitialized value.
>
> Signed-off-by: Sven Strickroth <email@cs-ware.de>
> ---
> builtin/rev-list.c | 2 +-
> 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/builtin/rev-list.c b/builtin/rev-list.c
> index 67701be..13afacd 100644
> --- a/builtin/rev-list.c
> +++ b/builtin/rev-list.c
> @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ int cmd_rev_list(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> mark_edges_uninteresting(revs.commits, &revs, show_edge);
>
> if (bisect_list) {
> - int reaches = reaches, all = all;
> + int reaches = 0, all = 0;
>
> revs.commits = find_bisection(revs.commits, &reaches, &all,
> bisect_find_all);But this generates worse code, at least using gcc 4.7.2:
--- old 2013-05-09 14:33:22.000000000 +0200 +++ new 2013-05-09 14:33:02.000000000 +0200
Show changes to diff +1 −1
@@ -1,2 +1,2 @@ text data bss dec hex filename - 4283 0 0 4283 10bb builtin/rev-list.o + 4299 0 0 4299 10cb builtin/rev-list.o Krzysiek
Jonathan NiederRe: [PATCH 3/3] Initialize variables with values
Hi,
Sven Strickroth wrote:
> With MSVC initializing a variable with "int a=a" causes a warning about > using an uninitialized value.
[...]
Show 8 quoted lines
> --- a/builtin/rev-list.c
> +++ b/builtin/rev-list.c
> @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ int cmd_rev_list(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
> mark_edges_uninteresting(revs.commits, &revs, show_edge);
>
> if (bisect_list) {
> - int reaches = reaches, all = all;
> + int reaches = 0, all = 0;A correct way to spell this is
int reaches, all;
which, as a bonus, lets the compiler warn if they are used uninitialized. Does that provoke warnings?
Thanks, Jonathan
Re: [PATCH 3/3] Initialize variables with values
Am 09.05.2013 15:21 schrieb Jonathan Nieder:
Show 20 quoted lines
> Sven Strickroth wrote:
>
>> With MSVC initializing a variable with "int a=a" causes a warning about
>> using an uninitialized value.
> [...]
>> --- a/builtin/rev-list.c
>> +++ b/builtin/rev-list.c
>> @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ int cmd_rev_list(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>> mark_edges_uninteresting(revs.commits, &revs, show_edge);
>>
>> if (bisect_list) {
>> - int reaches = reaches, all = all;
>> + int reaches = 0, all = 0;
>
> A correct way to spell this is
>
> int reaches, all;
>
> which, as a bonus, lets the compiler warn if they are used
> uninitialized. Does that provoke warnings?This seems to be ok.
-- Best regards, Sven Strickroth PGP key id F5A9D4C4 @ any key-server
René ScharfeRe: [PATCH 3/3] Initialize variables with values
Am 09.05.2013 15:21, schrieb Jonathan Nieder:
Show 22 quoted lines
> Hi,
>
> Sven Strickroth wrote:
>
>> With MSVC initializing a variable with "int a=a" causes a warning about
>> using an uninitialized value.
> [...]
>> --- a/builtin/rev-list.c
>> +++ b/builtin/rev-list.c
>> @@ -338,7 +338,7 @@ int cmd_rev_list(int argc, const char **argv, const char *prefix)
>> mark_edges_uninteresting(revs.commits, &revs, show_edge);
>>
>> if (bisect_list) {
>> - int reaches = reaches, all = all;
>> + int reaches = 0, all = 0;
>
> A correct way to spell this is
>
> int reaches, all;
>
> which, as a bonus, lets the compiler warn if they are used
> uninitialized. Does that provoke warnings?Only find_bisection() (defined in bisect.c) is used to set these variables in that block. While it sets "all" unconditionally, it doesn't always set "reaches" -- only if it actually finds something. That's still safe because the following code path errors out early if nothing was found before it uses "reaches".
Are there C compilers that can analyse initialization and usage of variables across compilation units like that?
Anyway, initializing the variables to zero makes this code consistent with the second call-site of find_bisection(). Making sure this function sets "reaches" unconditionally as well and dropping the initialization from both places may be even better.
René