On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Henrik Grubbström (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum 10353@lyskom.lysator.liu.se wrote:
This looks like a good opportunity to mention a few patches that I haven't heard back regarding. They're mostly fairly trivial/simple. Is there a better way to suggest patches than posting them to this list or pike@roxen?
Either works.
Applied all of them except for the low_read_file() patch, which I fail to see a reason for.
Thanks!
That was to cure a compiler warning using gcc on OS/2, if I recall correctly. Not a big deal, was just a "try to make sure things are safe" check. Unlikely - if even possible - to make a difference on any actually-supported platform.
ChrisA
On Sun, Nov 17, 2013 at 11:40 PM, Henrik Grubbström (Lysator) @ Pike (-) developers forum 10353@lyskom.lysator.liu.se wrote:
This looks like a good opportunity to mention a few patches that I haven't heard back regarding. They're mostly fairly trivial/simple. Is there a better way to suggest patches than posting them to this list or pike@roxen?
Either works.
Applied all of them except for the low_read_file() patch, which I fail to see a reason for.
Thanks!
That was to cure a compiler warning using gcc on OS/2, if I recall correctly. Not a big deal, was just a "try to make sure things are safe" check. Unlikely - if even possible - to make a difference on any actually-supported platform.
The PRINTPIKEOFFT stuff is intended to fix such warnings. A problem with the patch was that it wasn't 64-bit clean, and as it is just a fatal diagnostic I don't see any reason to change it.
/grubba
pike-devel@lists.lysator.liu.se
-
Chris Angelico -
Henrik Grubbstr�m (Lysator) ＠ Pike (-) developers forum