You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by Joe Orton <jo...@redhat.com> on 2018/11/02 09:39:47 UTC
[PATCH] svn/conflict-callbacks.c indentation fix
There are two gcc 8.x (I'm using 8.2.1) warnings from which catch those:
if (foo)
bar;
baz;
type of errors. I fixed one case which looks obviously like a false
positive in r1845556, but I'm not sure about the other one, in this
code:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c?view=markup#l1528
The warning is:
subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c: In function ‘build_tree_conflict_options’:
subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c:1531:7: warning: this ‘if’ clause does not guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
if (all_options_are_dumb != NULL &&
^~
subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c:1537:9: note: ...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it were guarded by the ‘if’
if (*possible_moved_to_repos_relpaths == NULL)
Can someone familiar with the code check whether it's OK?
[[[
* subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c
(build_tree_conflict_options): No functional change; fix
indentation to avoid gcc -Wmisleading-indentation warning.
]]]
Re: [PATCH] svn/conflict-callbacks.c indentation fix
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On 02.11.2018 11:33, James McCoy wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 11:08:10AM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 10:49:23AM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
>>> On 02.11.2018 10:44, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>>> I confirm that your patch is correct. I mis-indented these blocks.
>>> Time to start using a real editor, I guess? :)
>> The further I progress into adulthood, the more our tiny indentation
>> by two spaces seems to be causing me trouble...
>>
>> Maybe(we) could have another (historical) vote, on tabs vs spaces this time?
>> Disclaimer: I'd vote for tabs :)
> Or always use {}, even for 1 line blocks.
No space after bang! No space after bang! Ye who write 'if (! foo) ...'
with a space after the bang shall be forever cast into the void! Yaargh!
-- Brane
P.S.: This is shaping up to become a fun thread, heh heh.
Re: [PATCH] svn/conflict-callbacks.c indentation fix
Posted by James McCoy <ja...@jamessan.com>.
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 11:08:10AM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 10:49:23AM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> > On 02.11.2018 10:44, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > > I confirm that your patch is correct. I mis-indented these blocks.
> >
> > Time to start using a real editor, I guess? :)
>
> The further I progress into adulthood, the more our tiny indentation
> by two spaces seems to be causing me trouble...
>
> Maybe(we) could have another (historical) vote, on tabs vs spaces this time?
> Disclaimer: I'd vote for tabs :)
Or always use {}, even for 1 line blocks.
Cheers,
--
James
GPG Key: 4096R/91BF BF4D 6956 BD5D F7B7 2D23 DFE6 91AE 331B A3DB
Re: [PATCH] svn/conflict-callbacks.c indentation fix
Posted by Greg Stein <gs...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Nov 2, 2018 at 5:08 AM Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 10:49:23AM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> > On 02.11.2018 10:44, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > > I confirm that your patch is correct. I mis-indented these blocks.
> >
> > Time to start using a real editor, I guess? :)
>
> The further I progress into adulthood, the more our tiny indentation
> by two spaces seems to be causing me trouble...
>
> Maybe(we) could have another (historical) vote, on tabs vs spaces this
> time?
> Disclaimer: I'd vote for tabs :)
>
Heresy!!!
Re: [PATCH] svn/conflict-callbacks.c indentation fix
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 10:49:23AM +0100, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 02.11.2018 10:44, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> > I confirm that your patch is correct. I mis-indented these blocks.
>
> Time to start using a real editor, I guess? :)
The further I progress into adulthood, the more our tiny indentation
by two spaces seems to be causing me trouble...
Maybe(we) could have another (historical) vote, on tabs vs spaces this time?
Disclaimer: I'd vote for tabs :)
Re: [PATCH] svn/conflict-callbacks.c indentation fix
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@apache.org>.
On 02.11.2018 10:44, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 09:39:47AM +0000, Joe Orton wrote:
>> There are two gcc 8.x (I'm using 8.2.1) warnings from which catch those:
>>
>> if (foo)
>> bar;
>> baz;
>>
>> type of errors. I fixed one case which looks obviously like a false
>> positive in r1845556, but I'm not sure about the other one, in this
>> code:
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c?view=markup#l1528
>>
>> The warning is:
>>
>> subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c: In function ‘build_tree_conflict_options’:
>> subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c:1531:7: warning: this ‘if’ clause does not guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
>> if (all_options_are_dumb != NULL &&
>> ^~
>> subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c:1537:9: note: ...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it were guarded by the ‘if’
>> if (*possible_moved_to_repos_relpaths == NULL)
>>
>> Can someone familiar with the code check whether it's OK?
> Hi Joe,
>
> I confirm that your patch is correct. I mis-indented these blocks.
Time to start using a real editor, I guess? :)
-- Brane
Re: [PATCH] svn/conflict-callbacks.c indentation fix
Posted by Joe Orton <jo...@redhat.com>.
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 10:44:33AM +0100, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> I confirm that your patch is correct. I mis-indented these blocks.
Great, thank you for checking, Stefan. Committed in r1845559.
Re: [PATCH] svn/conflict-callbacks.c indentation fix
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Fri, Nov 02, 2018 at 09:39:47AM +0000, Joe Orton wrote:
> There are two gcc 8.x (I'm using 8.2.1) warnings from which catch those:
>
> if (foo)
> bar;
> baz;
>
> type of errors. I fixed one case which looks obviously like a false
> positive in r1845556, but I'm not sure about the other one, in this
> code:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/subversion/trunk/subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c?view=markup#l1528
>
> The warning is:
>
> subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c: In function ‘build_tree_conflict_options’:
> subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c:1531:7: warning: this ‘if’ clause does not guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
> if (all_options_are_dumb != NULL &&
> ^~
> subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c:1537:9: note: ...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it were guarded by the ‘if’
> if (*possible_moved_to_repos_relpaths == NULL)
>
> Can someone familiar with the code check whether it's OK?
Hi Joe,
I confirm that your patch is correct. I mis-indented these blocks.
> [[[
> * subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c
> (build_tree_conflict_options): No functional change; fix
> indentation to avoid gcc -Wmisleading-indentation warning.
> ]]]
>
> Index: subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c
> ===================================================================
> --- subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c (revision 1845554)
> +++ subversion/svn/conflict-callbacks.c (working copy)
> @@ -1534,16 +1534,16 @@
> id != svn_client_conflict_option_accept_current_wc_state)
> *all_options_are_dumb = FALSE;
>
> - if (*possible_moved_to_repos_relpaths == NULL)
> - SVN_ERR(
> - svn_client_conflict_option_get_moved_to_repos_relpath_candidates2(
> - possible_moved_to_repos_relpaths, builtin_option,
> - result_pool, iterpool));
> + if (*possible_moved_to_repos_relpaths == NULL)
> + SVN_ERR(
> + svn_client_conflict_option_get_moved_to_repos_relpath_candidates2(
> + possible_moved_to_repos_relpaths, builtin_option,
> + result_pool, iterpool));
>
> - if (*possible_moved_to_abspaths == NULL)
> - SVN_ERR(svn_client_conflict_option_get_moved_to_abspath_candidates2(
> - possible_moved_to_abspaths, builtin_option,
> - result_pool, iterpool));
> + if (*possible_moved_to_abspaths == NULL)
> + SVN_ERR(svn_client_conflict_option_get_moved_to_abspath_candidates2(
> + possible_moved_to_abspaths, builtin_option,
> + result_pool, iterpool));
> }
>
> svn_pool_destroy(iterpool);