Em Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 01:49:04PM +0200, Ingo Molnar escreveu:
quoted text
> 
> * Brian Gitonga Marete <marete@toshnix.com> wrote:
> 
> > > OK. Now that I actually look closely at that fragment I can see its useless to 
> > > create the automatic arrays. Local string literals would also work (i.e. just 
> > > pass `"Yes"' and `"No"' to newtWinChoice). But can also do what you suggested if 
> > > it is anticipated that they will be used somewhere else within the file at some 
> > > other time -- Currently they are not.
> > 
> > Oops. Sorry. What I suggested won't work because of the -Wwrite-strings default 
> > option. Which actually makes me understand why the original author of the code 
> > made it the way it is. Your suggestion of file-scope, static does solve the 
> > problem.
> 
> Btw., -Wwrite-strings has proven to be a really useful warning in practice, in that 
> it ensured that we propagate string immutability/const-ness as widely as possible. 
> This resulted is cleaner perf code in the long run.
> 
> Here we cannot fix the Newt prototype (it's an existing library outside of our 
> control) to take a const so we have to do the (mild) workaround of moving it to file 
> scope. (if this becomes common then we'd have to re-evaluate the use of this 
> warning)
> 
> I think Arnaldo has plans to get rid of the libnewt dependency altogether - that 
> might be a fix too.

Yeah, but for now I'll just reap the results of this long discussion
about this issue. :)

- Arnaldo
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/