GCC 4.6 warnings cleanup

GCC 4.6 warnings cleanup

BUG=seccompsandbox:16
TEST=compile with gcc 4.6

[ph34r, 2011-07-08 13:26:07]

I'm not sure if I'm doing it right, but all tests pass.

[ph34r, 2011-09-16 11:19:29]

Please review this CL. Any help is greatly appreciated.

[agl, 2011-09-16 13:22:21]

(sandbox code; leaving for Markus)

[Markus (顧孟勤), 2011-09-16 16:07:32]

Overall this looks OK, but please see the comment below.

http://codereview.chromium.org/7326013/diff/1/x86_decode.cc
File x86_decode.cc (left):

http://codereview.chromium.org/7326013/diff/1/x86_decode.cc#oldcode173
x86_decode.cc:173: bool found_mod_rm = false;
While currently unused, these statements actually help document important parts
of the code, and they might be helpful in future versions of the code.

I'd prefer if we could leave them in the code.

Can we do something to make gcc not warn about them?

[ph34r, 2011-09-16 16:30:15]

I can suggest only a few things:
1. Comment them out.
2. Add (void)found_mod_rm; (void)found_sib; with a comment that it suppresses
warnings.

[Markus (顧孟勤), 2011-09-16 17:01:11]

Option 2 sounds fine to me. And I don't think it even needs comments. It is
a fairly common pattern for exactly this purpose.

Alternatively, you could consider just adding a suitable #pragma statement.



Markus

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 09:30, <pph34r@gmail.com> wrote:

> I can suggest only a few things:
> 1. Comment them out.
> 2. Add (void)found_mod_rm; (void)found_sib; with a comment that it
> suppresses
> warnings.
>
>
>
http://codereview.chromium.**org/7326013/<http://codereview.chromium.org/7326...
>

[ph34r, 2011-09-16 17:49:26]

PTAL. I've chosen option 2 :)

[Markus (顧孟勤), 2011-09-16 18:24:51]

LGTM

I guess, you need me to apply this changelist?

On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 10:49, <pph34r@gmail.com> wrote:

> PTAL. I've chosen option 2 :)
>
>
>
http://codereview.chromium.**org/7326013/<http://codereview.chromium.org/7326...
>

[ph34r, 2011-09-16 18:29:58]

Yes in case the commit box will not work there.

[Markus (顧孟勤), 2011-09-16 18:44:07]

On 2011/09/16 18:29:58, ph34r wrote:
> Yes in case the commit box will not work there.

Committed as r169

[ph34r, 2011-09-16 18:45:32]

On 2011/09/16 18:44:07, Markus (顧孟勤) wrote:
> On 2011/09/16 18:29:58, ph34r wrote:
> > Yes in case the commit box will not work there.
> 
> Committed as r169

Thank you!