<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Rémi Denis-Courmont wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:200908220943.14402.remi@remlab.net" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Le vendredi 21 août 2009 23:15:09 Pierre d'Herbemont, vous avez écrit :
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On Aug 21, 2009, at 9:31 PM, git version control wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">+# warning FIXME!
+# define fork() (errno = ENOSYS, -1)
+ (void)pid;
+ (void)psz_capability;
+ return true;
+#endif
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">I used to have no opinion on this, but I think that VLC_UNUSED(arg) is
a lot better than (void)arg. Mostly because this is more explicit, and
then because it could be instrumented.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I find it VLC_UGLY and pointless.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">As a side node __attribute__((unused)) is probably better since it
could allow certain optimization from the compiler. We could switch to
it.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
The compiler is quite stupid if it cannot optimize (void)foo; to nothing.
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hence VLC_UNUSED makes it a bit easier if we wanted, for instance, to
switch to __attribute__((unused)), because grep wouldn't return false
positive.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
I disagree. (void)foo; is more legible if only because it is standard
practice. I don't like to reinvent C.
</pre>
</blockquote>
[0xa51040] main libvlc debug: CPU has capabilities 486 586 MMX MMXEXT
SSE SSE2 FPU <br>
[0xa51040] main libvlc debug: looking for memcpy module: 3 candidates<br>
[0xa51040] main libvlc debug: using memcpy module "memcpymmxext"<br>
My CPU supports 3DNow! (+) instruction and it is not been detected by
vlc.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>