On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 05:36:44PM +0000, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 03:26:09AM +0100, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> > @@ -48,6 +49,19 @@ VIR_MOCK_IMPL_RET_ARGS(xc_interface_open,
> > }
> >
> >
> > +VIR_MOCK_IMPL_RET_ARGS(libxl_get_version_info,
> > + const libxl_version_info*,
> > + libxl_ctx *, ctx)
> > +{
> > + static libxl_version_info info;
> > +
> > + memset(&info, 0, sizeof(info));
> > +
> > + return &info;
> > + /* silence gcc warning */
> > + return real_libxl_get_version_info(ctx);
>
> Why was gcc warning about that requires the second return
> statement ? I would have though this would /cause/ a
> warning by creating unreachable code ?
Because or static real_##name in (unused otherwise):
# define VIR_MOCK_IMPL_RET_ARGS(name, rettype, ...) \
rettype name(VIR_MOCK_ARGTYPENAMES(__VA_ARGS__)); \
static rettype (*real_##name)(VIR_MOCK_ARGTYPES(__VA_ARGS__)); \
rettype name(VIR_MOCK_ARGTYPENAMES_UNUSED(__VA_ARGS__))
--
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- libvir-list mailing list libvir-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvir-list
