bug-gv
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [bug-gv] [PATCH] avoid shadowing identifiers


From: Bernhard R. Link
Subject: Re: [bug-gv] [PATCH] avoid shadowing identifiers
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2011 20:32:59 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)

* Markus Steinborn <address@hidden> [110429 19:47]:
>> --- a/gv/src/callbacks.c
>> +++ b/gv/src/callbacks.c
>> @@ -1032,9 +1032,8 @@ cb_presentation(w, client_data, call_data)
>>       XtPointer client_data, call_data;
>>   {
>>       int pid;
>> -    typedef void (*sighandler_t)(int);
>>       sighandler_t sigold;
>>    
> This change do have a serious regression on Mac OS X (I've just got the  
> bug report):
>
> :info:build  callbacks.c: In function 'cb_presentation':
> :info:build  callbacks.c:1034: error: 'sighandler_t' undeclared (first use in 
> this function)
> :info:build  callbacks.c:1034: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported 
> only once
> :info:build  callbacks.c:1034: error: for each function it appears in.)
> :info:build  callbacks.c:1034: error: expected ';' before 'sigold'
> :info:build  callbacks.c:1038: error: 'sigold' undeclared (first use in this 
> function)
> :info:build  make[2]: *** [callbacks.o] Error 1
> :info:build  make[1]: *** [all] Error 2
> :info:build  make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
>
>
> Unless we find a better solution (GNULIB doesn't seem to provide  
> sighandler_t, because "find -type f -exec grep sighandler_t {} +" does  
> not find any match) I'll have to add the typedef again.

Why a typedef? and if a typedef why with the same name as the standard
library uses?

Why not simply a

void (*sigold)(int);

?

By the way: Why does this function call /usr/bin/env? Is anything wrong
with execlp?

        Bernhard R. Link



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]