31/6de9bc13c8a45a441a76f85c7e05c8e20b88e2

   1 Return-Path: <amdragon@mit.edu>\r
   2 X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
   3 Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
   4 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])\r
   5         by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1D6AB431FD0\r
   6         for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:14:52 -0800 (PST)\r
   7 X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org\r
   8 X-Spam-Flag: NO\r
   9 X-Spam-Score: -0.7\r
  10 X-Spam-Level: \r
  11 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.7 tagged_above=-999 required=5\r
  12         tests=[RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=disabled\r
  13 Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1])\r
  14         by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)\r
  15         with ESMTP id CCiWpi9J6w23 for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>;\r
  16         Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:14:51 -0800 (PST)\r
  17 Received: from dmz-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu (DMZ-MAILSEC-SCANNER-4.MIT.EDU\r
  18         [18.9.25.15])\r
  19         by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 64C95431FB6\r
  20         for <notmuch@notmuchmail.org>; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 12:14:51 -0800 (PST)\r
  21 X-AuditID: 1209190f-b7f8a6d000000914-54-4ef38fbaff34\r
  22 Received: from mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu ( [18.9.21.35])\r
  23         by dmz-mailsec-scanner-4.mit.edu (Symantec Messaging Gateway) with SMTP\r
  24         id EC.7D.02324.ABF83FE4; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:14:50 -0500 (EST)\r
  25 Received: from outgoing.mit.edu (OUTGOING-AUTH.MIT.EDU [18.7.22.103])\r
  26         by mailhub-auth-1.mit.edu (8.13.8/8.9.2) with ESMTP id pBMKEnq1013291; \r
  27         Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:14:50 -0500\r
  28 Received: from awakening.csail.mit.edu (awakening.csail.mit.edu [18.26.4.91])\r
  29         (authenticated bits=0)\r
  30         (User authenticated as amdragon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU)\r
  31         by outgoing.mit.edu (8.13.6/8.12.4) with ESMTP id pBMKEmqd005829\r
  32         (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT);\r
  33         Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:14:49 -0500 (EST)\r
  34 Received: from amthrax by awakening.csail.mit.edu with local (Exim 4.77)\r
  35         (envelope-from <amdragon@mit.edu>)\r
  36         id 1Rdp3R-0000Ch-4Q; Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:15:53 -0500\r
  37 Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 15:15:53 -0500\r
  38 From: Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU>\r
  39 To: David Edmondson <dme@dme.org>\r
  40 Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] notmuch: Workaround to allow ignoring non-void\r
  41         function return.\r
  42 Message-ID: <20111222201553.GK10376@mit.edu>\r
  43 References: <1324503532-5799-1-git-send-email-dme@dme.org>\r
  44         <20111222070345.GI10376@mit.edu>\r
  45         <cunfwgdvzpy.fsf@hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net>\r
  46         <20111222190305.GA324@mit.edu>\r
  47         <cuny5u4v260.fsf@hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net>\r
  48 MIME-Version: 1.0\r
  49 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii\r
  50 Content-Disposition: inline\r
  51 In-Reply-To: <cuny5u4v260.fsf@hotblack-desiato.hh.sledj.net>\r
  52 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)\r
  53 X-Brightmail-Tracker:\r
  54  H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFmplleLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42IR4hRV1t3V/9nP4PZGHYt9d7YwWVy/OZPZ\r
  55         gclj1/O/TB7PVt1iDmCK4rJJSc3JLEst0rdL4MqYfOQbW8Fp7oorHe9ZGhjfc3QxcnJICJhI\r
  56         TLx5hw3CFpO4cG89kM3FISSwj1Fi9amrjBDOBkaJye+eQ2VOMkl8e/oDylnCKLHt3VVWkH4W\r
  57         AVWJ98t/gc1iE9CQ2LZ/OSOILSKgKPH/2wp2EJtZQFri2+9mJhBbWCBa4uqP4ywgNq+AjsSr\r
  58         5+9YIYY+YpSYOHkBE0RCUOLkzCcsEM1aEjf+vQSKc4ANWv4P7AdOARuJqW1HwOaLCqhITDm5\r
  59         jW0Co9AsJN2zkHTPQuhewMi8ilE2JbdKNzcxM6c4NVm3ODkxLy+1SNdELzezRC81pXQTIzi0\r
  60         Jfl3MH47qHSIUYCDUYmHt7Los58Qa2JZcWXuIUZJDiYlUV6dPqAQX1J+SmVGYnFGfFFpTmrx\r
  61         IUYJDmYlEd4KRqAcb0piZVVqUT5MSpqDRUmcV03rnZ+QQHpiSWp2ampBahFMVoaDQ0mCNxUY\r
  62         w0KCRanpqRVpmTklCGkmDk6Q4TxAwyNAaniLCxJzizPTIfKnGBWlxHndQBICIImM0jy4Xljq\r
  63         ecUoDvSKMK8ySBUPMG3Bdb8CGswENHib8weQwSWJCCmpBsYpPpWqB+LCL39KPvXw/w59Sz4F\r
  64         fw7NQxNn9k1+Kj034vd+F+bFqZEb9e2e/g+1VjoaufcFt39uuqZ+iNjz+REimT3Hana6fu5w\r
  65         mnPO4H/A9xcM0x1NP38+F9LyujQ45l520vo9VYcPfN1Z+aRKI5v971pWi+UfO5ybjxxvcjSN\r
  66         CvPS4+ns/6rEUpyRaKjFXFScCABu8T57GAMAAA==\r
  67 Cc: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
  68 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org\r
  69 X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13\r
  70 Precedence: list\r
  71 List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system."\r
  72         <notmuch.notmuchmail.org>\r
  73 List-Unsubscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/options/notmuch>,\r
  74         <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=unsubscribe>\r
  75 List-Archive: <http://notmuchmail.org/pipermail/notmuch>\r
  76 List-Post: <mailto:notmuch@notmuchmail.org>\r
  77 List-Help: <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=help>\r
  78 List-Subscribe: <http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch>,\r
  79         <mailto:notmuch-request@notmuchmail.org?subject=subscribe>\r
  80 X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 20:14:52 -0000\r
  81 \r
  82 Quoth David Edmondson on Dec 22 at  7:25 pm:\r
  83 > On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 14:03:05 -0500, Austin Clements <amdragon@MIT.EDU> wrote:\r
  84 > > > In general I agree, but what would we do if writing an error message to\r
  85 > > > stderr fails?\r
  86 > > \r
  87 > > This was discussed on IRC, but calls to write(2) should never be bare.\r
  88 > > I believe it's marked warn_unused_result not because libc is so\r
  89 > > concerned with people checking for error returns (otherwise all sorts\r
  90 > > of things would be marked warn_unused_result) but because even a\r
  91 > > successful write can be a short write.  Hence, not checking the result\r
  92 > > is a bug, even if you don't care about errors.\r
  93 > \r
  94 > As I said, the principle is sound. What would do in this specific case?\r
  95 > \r
  96 > static void\r
  97 > handle_sigint (unused (int sig))\r
  98 > {\r
  99 >     static char msg[] = "Stopping...         \n";\r
 100 > \r
 101 >     write(2, msg, sizeof(msg)-1);\r
 102 >     interrupted = 1;\r
 103 > }\r
 104 > \r
 105 > Just this?\r
 106 > \r
 107 >      if (write(2, msg, sizeof(msg)-1) {\r
 108 >         /* Appease the compiler. */;\r
 109 >      }\r
 110 \r
 111 Maybe I missed something, but what's wrong with using a standard write\r
 112 loop (like j4ni suggested on IRC)?  In my mind this isn't about\r
 113 appeasing the compiler; the compiler is pointing out a real bug.\r
 114 Patch coming in a moment...\r
 115 \r
 116 I'm not sure what to do about the specific case of fwrite, though\r
 117 judging by\r
 118   http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=11959\r
 119 I'm not the only person who thinks that fwrite being\r
 120 warn_unused_result is odd.\r
 121 \r