Robert Shearman wrote:
We're trying to work around GCC warnings that probably aren't generated using any other compiler so using non-portable C constructs is perfectly fine. Here is Francois' solution again:
I understand Francois's solution, as I mentioned that the gcc guys proposed it in the first place. Sorry, but I don't think using non-portable C constructs to solve a warning is a good solution. Why layer on complexity when there's a simple solution?
It seemed to be ignored by both you and Alexandre last time it was sent, and all of your patches applied anyway despite objections from several developers.
If you don't like it, show me your patches to fix the problem.
Mike