Re: dlls/dinput/effect_linuxinput.c: Check return value of 'write'. (bug # 16413)

[Vitaliy Margolen]

titon barua wrote:
> ---
>      /* we don't care about the success or failure of this call */
> -    write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event));
> +    /* print errors if they occur */
> +    if (write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event)) == -1) perror ( NULL );
> What's the point of your patch? What part of the comment isn't clear to you?
> Also don't use perror. Wine has ERR(), WARN(), TRACE() macros for that.

Vitaliy

dlls/dinput/effect_linuxinput.c: Check return value of 'write'. (bug # 16413)

[Austin English]

On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Vitaliy Margolen
<wine-devel(a)kievinfo.com> wrote:
> titon barua wrote:
> > ---
> >      /* we don't care about the success or failure of this call */
> > -    write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event));
> > +    /* print errors if they occur */
> > +    if (write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event)) == -1) perror ( NULL );
> > What's the point of your patch? What part of the comment isn't clear to you?
> > Also don't use perror. Wine has ERR(), WARN(), TRACE() macros for that.
>
> Vitaliy

GCC is complaining about the ignored return value.

-- 
-Austin

dlls/dinput/effect_linuxinput.c: Check return value of 'write'. (bug # 16413)

[titon barua]

On Sun, 2009-01-04 at 20:49 -0600, Austin English wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 4:55 PM, Vitaliy Margolen
> <wine-devel(a)kievinfo.com> wrote:
> > titon barua wrote:
> > > ---
> > >      /* we don't care about the success or failure of this call */
> > > -    write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event));
> > > +    /* print errors if they occur */
> > > +    if (write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event)) == -1) perror ( NULL );
> > > What's the point of your patch? What part of the comment isn't clear to you?
> > > Also don't use perror. Wine has ERR(), WARN(), TRACE() macros for that.
> >
> > Vitaliy
>
> GCC is complaining about the ignored return value.

As the code says /* we dont care */ but gcc prints warnings, is it ok
with just 
"if (write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event)));"

Gcc wont complain and the code is as before?

dlls/dinput/effect_linuxinput.c: Check return value of 'write'. (bug # 16413)

[Michael Karcher]

Am Montag, den 05.01.2009, 11:06 +0600 schrieb titon barua:
> > GCC is complaining about the ignored return value.
>
> As the code says /* we dont care */ but gcc prints warnings, is it ok
> with just 
> "if (write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event)));"
>
> Gcc wont complain and the code is as before?

what about
 (void)write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event));

Does that work to? Seems nicer than the if.

Regards,
  Michael Karcher

dlls/dinput/effect_linuxinput.c: Check return value of 'write'. (bug # 16413)

[titon barua]

On Mon, 2009-01-05 at 08:47 +0100, Michael Karcher wrote:
> Am Montag, den 05.01.2009, 11:06 +0600 schrieb titon barua:
> > > GCC is complaining about the ignored return value.
> >
> > As the code says /* we dont care */ but gcc prints warnings, is it ok
> > with just 
> > "if (write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event)));"
> >
> > Gcc wont complain and the code is as before?
>
> what about
>  (void)write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event));
>
> Does that work to? Seems nicer than the if.
>
> Regards,
>   Michael Karcher
> Compiler warning remains.

dlls/dinput/effect_linuxinput.c: Check return value of 'write'. (bug # 16413)

[Damjan Jovanovic]

On Mon, Jan 5, 2009 at 1:45 PM, titon barua <titanix88(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-01-05 at 08:47 +0100, Michael Karcher wrote:
> > Am Montag, den 05.01.2009, 11:06 +0600 schrieb titon barua:
> > > > GCC is complaining about the ignored return value.
> > >
> > > As the code says /* we dont care */ but gcc prints warnings, is it ok
> > > with just
> > > "if (write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event)));"
> > >
> > > Gcc wont complain and the code is as before?
> >
> > what about
> >  (void)write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event));
> >
> > Does that work to? Seems nicer than the if.
> >
> > Regards,
> >   Michael Karcher
> > Compiler warning remains.

ssize_t ignored;
...
ignored = write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event));

You could make the ignored variable static, maybe even global.

Damjan

dlls/dinput/effect_linuxinput.c: Check return value of 'write'. (bug # 16413)

[James McKenzie]

Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
> titon barua wrote:
> > ---
> >      /* we don't care about the success or failure of this call */
> > -    write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event));
> > +    /* print errors if they occur */
> > +    if (write(*(This->fd), &event, sizeof(event)) == -1) perror ( NULL );
>
> What's the point of your patch? What part of the comment isn't clear to you?
> Also don't use perror. Wine has ERR(), WARN(), TRACE() macros for that.

How about this:

Titon, this code does not need to be 'fixed' as it works the way it is 
supposed to.

Please remove this code and resubmit.

I was uncertain of what Titon was trying to fix so I looked up perror 
and it is not needed at this point and introduces uncertainty into the code.

James McKenzie