[MPlayer-cvslog] r36944 - in trunk/gui/win32: interface.c playlist.c playlist.h

[Ingo Brückl]

Reimar Döffinger wrote on Tue, 25 Feb 2014 23:23:04 +0100:

> On 25.02.2014, at 23:14, Ingo Brückl <ib at wupperonline.de> wrote:
>> Reimar Döffinger wrote on Tue, 25 Feb 2014 22:44:55 +0100:
>>
>>> On 25.02.2014, at 22:29, Ingo Brückl <ib at wupperonline.de> wrote:
>>>> Reimar Döffinger wrote on Tue, 25 Feb 2014 20:43:51 +0100:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 07:39:10PM +0100, Ingo Brückl wrote:
>>>>>> Reimar Döffinger wrote on Tue, 25 Feb 2014 19:01:27 +0100:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> @@ -501,6 +501,8 @@ static unsigned __stdcall GuiThread(void
>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>    MSG msg;
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> +    (void) param;
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a bit ugly and might not work in all compilers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'd say it'll work on most (all?) compilers. Yes, it's ugly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think using av_unused on the parameter would be nicer,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't mind using it, but it would be nice if gcc would warn if such a
>>>>>> parameter *will* be used later. (This is the only thing I dislike about the
>>>>>> (void) solution. It'll look strange if you forget to remove it later. With
>>>>>> av_unused it'll even look stranger.)
>>>>
>>>>> I don't think gcc warns, in part because it is sometimes used for
>>>>> variables that will only be used under some #ifdef.
>>>>> But I never actually checked...
>>>>
>>>> Do we have a chance to change the definition of av_unused to something like
>>>>
>>>> #define av_unused(v) __attribute__((unused)) v##_unused
>>>>
>>>> or should we define a mp_unused like this?
>>
>>> Couldn't you just rename the variable itself when you add the av_unused?
>>> Doesn't seem to me like there's that much benefit in having it hidden in
>>> a macro.
>>
>> The idea behind it is to only add or remove a mp_unused() without changing
>> any identifiers (and to automatically disable the usage of those marked
>> mp_unused()).

> My point is: what is the big advantage of a diff from
> int somevar;
> to
> int mp_unused(somevar);
> instead of
> int av_unused somevar_unused;

Not much difference in a diff I have to admit, but I think the first one
looks nicer and if you are going to mark a variable unused you don't have to
remember to rename the variable as well (or you won't notice if it may be
still used). The mp_unused() is a bit more "fail-safe" and easier to use,
IMO.

Ingo