Return-Path: MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: References: <1339761848-7472-1-git-send-email-hdante@profusion.mobi> Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2012 10:20:42 -0300 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC] gdbus: Rename variables named "signal" (so that it can be compiled with -Wshadow) From: Joao Paulo Rechi Vita To: Lucas De Marchi Cc: Henrique Dante , Anderson Lizardo , linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 6:41 PM, Lucas De Marchi wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Joao Paulo Rechi Vita > wrote: >> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:45 AM, Henrique Dante wrote: >>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:43 AM, Henrique Dante wrote: >>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 9:29 AM, Anderson Lizardo >>>> wrote: >>>>> Hi Henrique, >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Jun 15, 2012 at 8:04 AM, Henrique Dante de Almeida >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> --- >>>>>>  gdbus/object.c |   39 +++++++++++++++++++++------------------ >>>>>>  gdbus/watch.c  |    4 ++-- >>>>>>  2 files changed, 23 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-) >>>>> >>>>> Would it be interesting to add this option to acinclude.m4? Or does it >>>>> generate too much noise? >>>> >>>>  It generates few warnings. Depending on the acceptance of this patch, >>>> I could fix bluez as a whole and add -Wshadow to acinclude.m4. >>> >>>  Actually, I had a partial build here. Ignore the previous answer, it >>> generates a lot of warnings. >>> >> >> If we're not going to enable -Wshadow by default, does it make sense >> to apply this patch? Who is going to check if no new shadow warnings >> are being inserted in new commits? > > I'm all for doing the following: > > 1) Fix all the places with shadow variables > 2) Add -Wshadow to the warning flags > > There are lots of them. > Yes, that makes sense. -- João Paulo Rechi Vita Openbossa Labs - INdT