Closed Bug 605179 Opened 15 years ago Closed 15 years ago

Fix build warnings in gfx/

Categories

(Core :: Graphics, defect)

x86
Linux
defect
Not set
normal

Tracking

()

RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: Ms2ger, Assigned: Ms2ger)

References

Details

(Whiteboard: [build_warning])

Attachments

(1 file, 3 obsolete files)

Attached patch Patch v1 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
No description provided.
Flags: in-testsuite-
Attachment #484015 - Flags: review?(roc)
+ PRInt32 major = 0, minor = 0, final = 0; Move these assignments to a "default:" case in the switch (and put an NS_ERROR there to say that it's unreached) + FcPattern* pattern = NULL; I don't understand this one. pattern is assigned along both branches of the 'if'. Why is this needed?
(In reply to comment #1) > + PRInt32 major = 0, minor = 0, final = 0; > > Move these assignments to a "default:" case in the switch (and put an NS_ERROR > there to say that it's unreached) Ok. > + FcPattern* pattern = NULL; > > I don't understand this one. pattern is assigned along both branches of the > 'if'. Why is this needed? No idea. Compiler being stupid, I suppose.
Attached patch Patch v2 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
(In reply to comment #2) > > + FcPattern* pattern = NULL; > > > > I don't understand this one. pattern is assigned along both branches of the > > 'if'. Why is this needed? > > No idea. Compiler being stupid, I suppose. Seems like it actually wasn't necessary. Not sure what happened here.
Attachment #484015 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #491902 - Flags: review?(roc)
Attachment #484015 - Flags: review?(roc)
Attached patch Patch v2.1 (obsolete) — Splinter Review
Merged to tip.
Attachment #491902 - Attachment is obsolete: true
Attachment #492051 - Flags: review?(roc)
Attachment #491902 - Flags: review?(roc)
Attachment #492051 - Flags: approval2.0?
Attachment #492051 - Flags: approval2.0? → approval2.0+
Keywords: checkin-needed
Thanks.
Attachment #492051 - Attachment is obsolete: true
patching file gfx/thebes/gfxASurface.cpp Hunk #1 FAILED at 481
Keywords: checkin-needed
Status: ASSIGNED → RESOLVED
Closed: 15 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
so, that mathematical impossibility isn't. it's a c feature: <signed int> <mod> <unsigned int> is underspecified. e.g. -1 % 2 could be 1 or -1.
I would have rather we didn't take the qcms changes here. qcms is written in the subset of c99 supported by MSVC which include c++ style comments.
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Attachment

General

Created:
Updated:
Size: