Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

silence warning about if guard #18

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

maage
Copy link

@maage maage commented Aug 3, 2016

gcc 6.1.1 has this warning at Fedora 24.
I'm not quite sure how to fix this right, now patch does fixes the warning and it should do as previously. So this should be just style without functional change.

In file included from src/sregex/sre_vm_thompson_jit.c:16:0:
./dynasm/dasm_x86.h: In function 'dasm_put':
./dynasm/dasm_x86.h:207:2: warning: this 'if' clause does not guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]
  if (*p++ == 1 && *p == DASM_DISP) mrm = n; continue;
  ^~
./dynasm/dasm_x86.h:207:45: note: ...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the 'if'
  if (*p++ == 1 && *p == DASM_DISP) mrm = n; continue;
                                             ^~~~~~~~

In file included from src/sregex/sre_vm_thompson_jit.c:16:0:                                      ./dynasm/dasm_x86.h: In function 'dasm_put':                                                      ./dynasm/dasm_x86.h:207:2: warning: this 'if' clause does not guard... [-Wmisleading-indentation]   if (*p++ == 1 && *p == DASM_DISP) mrm = n; continue;
  ^~                                                                                              ./dynasm/dasm_x86.h:207:45: note: ...this statement, but the latter is misleadingly indented as if it is guarded by the 'if'                                                                          if (*p++ == 1 && *p == DASM_DISP) mrm = n; continue;                                                                                         ^~~~~~~~
@agentzh
Copy link
Member

agentzh commented Aug 4, 2016

@maage Maybe we should update the upstream dynasm instead? We simply copied over the dynasm directory of the luajit-2.0 git repository BTW.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants