From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.2 (2018-09-13) on dcvr.yhbt.net X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.8 required=3.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,DKIM_INVALID, DKIM_SIGNED,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, NICE_REPLY_A,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS shortcircuit=no autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 163281F4B4 for ; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 10:45:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:48362 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kRCNl-000659-O2 for normalperson@yhbt.net; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 06:45:45 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41760) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kRCNg-000621-7r for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 06:45:40 -0400 Received: from mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de ([81.169.146.163]:13780) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kRCNe-0000Q4-3d for bug-gnulib@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Oct 2020 06:45:39 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1602326733; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=clisp.org; h=References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:Cc:To:From: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=JkfgfhmO2UBETYHs5aZrgAZndFtevjxRFU5nEy7lnhk=; b=AHxlTNCvvlQ9ZSbxGV3vffBTpNAuHHnOp3NPiHLeRCYFR6tahT7UpNs5bz3VO1iN0I sp1jkoSwJ6nDHgy97XLG1nniEGyvWWQ9KTX+of8QD5c57U4DA/EBerrhfjo6KU9Pl4pV rqLCTaG+Ij8EC2oyPaIp4VXF4PDUMZ5rxX3jJRTgY+zV2HkCneLtUPIYmEE1ocRsb1sM h3Gliv2tZ7MYVLpvCyjTWx3ve+MhhPOYuuGeAxtYr/CL2+GZzA3W/9OksB0vhoslA5E4 THx+6ccwhGttxfj4LR89iH3AdY1Hzp6EzqEI1ZjUwfPkUgtNW1P5GkJRqjhAj7fKvRDg lH6w== X-RZG-AUTH: ":Ln4Re0+Ic/6oZXR1YgKryK8brlshOcZlIWs+iCP5vnk6shH+AHjwLuWOGaf0yJVW" X-RZG-CLASS-ID: mo00 Received: from bruno.haible.de by smtp.strato.de (RZmta 47.2.1 DYNA|AUTH) with ESMTPSA id R01daaw9AAjVr1v (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (curve X9_62_prime256v1 with 256 ECDH bits, eq. 3072 bits RSA)) (Client did not present a certificate); Sat, 10 Oct 2020 12:45:31 +0200 (CEST) From: Bruno Haible To: Paul Eggert Subject: Re: clang warnings in regcomp.c Date: Sat, 10 Oct 2020 12:45:30 +0200 Message-ID: <2684036.PekjOv2fiQ@omega> User-Agent: KMail/5.1.3 (Linux/4.4.0-189-generic; KDE/5.18.0; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <4352488.g1GkCYmLPv@omega> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Received-SPF: none client-ip=81.169.146.163; envelope-from=bruno@clisp.org; helo=mo4-p00-ob.smtp.rzone.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/10/10 06:45:33 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -22 X-Spam_score: -2.3 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.208, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: bug-gnulib@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: Gnulib discussion list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: bug-gnulib@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnulib-bounces+normalperson=yhbt.net@gnu.org Sender: "bug-gnulib" Paul Eggert wrote: > > What is the point of these parentheses? > > Haven't a clue. It's an unusual style. > > > static reg_errcode_t preorder (bin_tree_t *root, > > - reg_errcode_t (fn (void *, bin_tree_t *)), > > + reg_errcode_t fn (void *, bin_tree_t *), > > void *extra); > > For corrections like that I suggest the style "reg_errcode_t (*fn) (void *, > bin_tree_t *)" instead, as that's the usual style in glibc and I expect it is > the style that was intended in regcomp.c anyway. Thanks for the advice. I reported it on the glibc tracker: https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26725 Bruno