This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the GDB project.
Re: [PATCH 18/348] Fix -Wsahdow warnings
- From: Pedro Alves <pedro at codesourcery dot com>
- To: gdb-patches at sourceware dot org
- Cc: "Ulrich Weigand" <uweigand at de dot ibm dot com>, Mark Kettenis <mark dot kettenis at xs4all dot nl>, andrew dot smirnov at gmail dot com
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:20:40 +0000
- Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/348] Fix -Wsahdow warnings
- References: <201111231640.pANGefc4031803@d06av02.portsmouth.uk.ibm.com>
On Wednesday 23 November 2011 16:40:41, Ulrich Weigand wrote:
> Mark Kettenis wrote:
> > > From: Andrey Smirnov <email@example.com>
> > > Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:25:56 +0700
> > > Subject: [PATCH 18/39] Fix -Wshadow warnings.
> > >
> > > * amd64-linux-tdep.c (amd64_canonicalize_syscall): Fix -Wshadow
> > > warnings.
> > Why the hell does -Wshadow complain here?
> > > -amd64_canonicalize_syscall (enum amd64_syscall syscall)
> > > +amd64_canonicalize_syscall (enum amd64_syscall syscall_number)
> I'd expect this is because the parameter "syscall" shadows the global
> function declaration "syscall" provided by glibc headers:
> /usr/include/unistd.h:extern long int syscall (long int __sysno, ...) __THROW;
Yeah, this is unfortunate because it means you trigger different
shadows on different hosts, or by configuring gdb differently.
There was this gcc patch
to stop -Wshadow from complaning about shadowing of symbols in system
headers, but it doesn't seem to have been applied, though it was okayed.