Re: [RFC][PATCH] notmuch: Workaround to allow ignoring non-void function return.
authorDavid Edmondson <dme@dme.org>
Thu, 22 Dec 2011 07:21:13 +0000 (07:21 +0000)
committerW. Trevor King <wking@tremily.us>
Fri, 7 Nov 2014 17:41:10 +0000 (09:41 -0800)
e0/adeeea236c10729c9250e50f36343dfb90ddff [new file with mode: 0644]

diff --git a/e0/adeeea236c10729c9250e50f36343dfb90ddff b/e0/adeeea236c10729c9250e50f36343dfb90ddff
new file mode 100644 (file)
index 0000000..3fde203
--- /dev/null
@@ -0,0 +1,88 @@
+Return-Path: <dme@dme.org>\r
+X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 00154431FD0\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 23:21:23 -0800 (PST)\r
+X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
+X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
+X-Spam-Score: -0.7\r
+X-Spam-Level: \r
+X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
+       tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled\r
+Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
+       by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
+       with ESMTP id Wg7aodrj+Rod for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
+       Wed, 21 Dec 2011 23:21:23 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from mail-wi0-f181.google.com (mail-wi0-f181.google.com\r
+       [209.85.212.181]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))\r
+       (No client certificate requested)\r
+       by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E137431FB6\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 23:21:23 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: by wibhq2 with SMTP id hq2so2995626wib.26\r
+       for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Wed, 21 Dec 2011 23:21:22 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: by 10.181.13.17 with SMTP id eu17mr20907233wid.12.1324538481778;\r
+       Wed, 21 Dec 2011 23:21:21 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: from hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net\r
+       (host81-149-164-25.in-addr.btopenworld.com. [81.149.164.25])\r
+       by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id di5sm19960843wib.3.2011.12.21.23.21.19\r
+       (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);\r
+       Wed, 21 Dec 2011 23:21:20 -0800 (PST)\r
+Received: by hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net (Postfix, from userid 30000)\r
+       id 4F782A05A7; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 07:21:18 +0000 (GMT)\r
+To: Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>\r
+Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] notmuch: Workaround to allow ignoring non-void\r
+       function return.\r
+In-Reply-To: <20111222070345.GI10376@mit.edu>\r
+References: <1324503532-5799-1-git-send-email-dme@dme.org>\r
+       <20111222070345.GI10376@mit.edu>\r
+User-Agent: Notmuch/0.10.2+107~ga2d0215 (http://notmuchmail.org)\r
+       Emacs/24.0.92.1 (x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)\r
+From: David Edmondson <dme@dme.org>\r
+Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 07:21:13 +0000\r
+Message-ID: <cunfwgdvzpy.fsf@hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net>\r
+MIME-Version: 1.0\r
+Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-=";\r
+       micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"\r
+Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
+Precedence: list\r
+List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
+       <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
+List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
+List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
+List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
+List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
+       <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
+X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 07:21:24 -0000\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+Content-Type: text/plain\r
+Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable\r
+\r
+On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 02:03:45 -0500, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> wrot=\r
+e:\r
+> I must admit I haven't been following the warnings problem very\r
+> closely, but perhaps we shouldn't be ignoring these return codes?\r
+\r
+In general I agree, but what would we do if writing an error message to\r
+stderr fails?\r
+\r
+dme.\r
+=2D-=20\r
+David Edmondson, http://dme.org\r
+\r
+--=-=-=\r
+Content-Type: application/pgp-signature\r
+\r
+-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux)\r
+\r
+iEYEARECAAYFAk7y2mkACgkQaezQq/BJZRbhGACfVnDqUTJHj1TDpju01n3o8/qh\r
+kRAAnisInj/TYRRyk80Vea+0XIhmmK+R\r
+=3IfH\r
+-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----\r
+--=-=-=--\r