Re: using `volatile' to silence gcc warnings

[Sam S. <sd...@gn...>]

> * Jerry James <ybt...@tz...> [2011-07-02 12:06:25 -0600]:
>
> I looked through the build logs for clisp, and found a number of
> warnings from gcc about variables that might be clobbered by a
> longjmp().  That ultimately proved to not be the problem.  However,
> I'm attaching the patch I made at that time to quiet the gcc warnings.
> Whether this patch prevents any actual problems from occurring will
> have to be decided by someone who knows the clisp code base.

Hi Jerry,
while I would love to see the ignorable warning disappear, I am a little
bit wary of using this patch because it seems that this abuses
`volatile' (its meaning is that "this variable can be modified outside
this process" which is not the same as what the warning is about).

--- src/control.d	19 Nov 2009 21:18:36 -0000	1.171
+++ src/control.d	2 Jul 2011 17:56:35 -0000
@@ -1593,7 +1593,7 @@
 
 LISPSPECFORM(tagbody, 0,0,body)
 { /* (TAGBODY {tag | statement}), CLTL p. 130 */
-  var object body = popSTACK();
+  var volatile object body = popSTACK();
   { /* build GENV-frame: */
     var gcv_object_t* top_of_frame = STACK; /* pointer to frame */
     pushSTACK(aktenv.go_env);

Bruno, WDYT?

-- 
Sam Steingold (http://sds.podval.org/) on CentOS release 5.6 (Final) X 11.0.60900031
http://pmw.org.il http://thereligionofpeace.com http://palestinefacts.org
http://www.PetitionOnline.com/tap12009/ http://openvotingconsortium.org
The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits.