Subject: compiler checks

From: Adam Spiers <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2012 23:04:11 +0000

On Fri, Sep 21, 2012 at 12:00:55PM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:
> Adam Spiers <[email-masked]> writes:
> 
> > It has been rebased on the latest master, and passed a full test run.
> 
> FYI, I applied the attached on top before queuing it in 'pu'.
> 
> Points to note:
> 
>  * We match the underline and the title of documentation header;
> 
>  * a few type mismatches (constness of full_path and treat_gitlink()
>    signature) that broke compilation;

Of course I will incorporate these tweaks in my re-roll, but it
worries me that my environment yielded no compilation issues even
without these tweaks.  Obviously I wouldn't have dreamed of submitting
a patch series which didn't even compile!  I'm using a modern gcc, and
I guess you probably are too?  Which would suggest to me that either
your environment is somehow set up to perform stricter type checking
than mine[1], or that there's a weird compiler-oriented bug somewhere
(e.g. in Makefile).  Or maybe I'm missing something obvious ...

[1] I'm in favour of stricter compiler checks where possible:
    http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/211607