Re: Fix empty macros in acpi.

[Dave Jones <davej@redhat.com>]

On Tue, Jul 03, 2007 at 01:22:47AM -0400, Len Brown wrote:

 > whelp, it seems that the reason for this patch is this:
 > 
 > #define DBG()
 > 
 > if(...)
 > 	DBG();
 > next_c_statement
 > 
 > which turns into
 > if(...) ;
 > next_c_statement
 > 
 > But since there is an intervening ';', this code is still functionally correct
 > and a decent compiler will delete the test altogether, yes?

Right, gcc does generate the correct code.

 > So is there some real problem here that I missed,
 > or is this to make some code-checking tool that I don't have happy?

Out of curiousity, I thought I'd see what was lurking in a -Wextra
build a while back. It's 99.9% noise, but a lot of it is trivial stuff
like this.

	Dave

-- 
http://www.codemonkey.org.uk
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/