| www.delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
| Date: | Wed, 31 May 2000 10:01:28 +0300 (IDT) |
| From: | Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
| X-Sender: | eliz AT is |
| To: | "Mark E." <snowball3 AT bigfoot DOT com> |
| cc: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
| Subject: | Re: __dosexec_find_on_path question |
| In-Reply-To: | <39345E39.31070.44E4CF@localhost> |
| Message-ID: | <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000531095944.8817M@is> |
| MIME-Version: | 1.0 |
| Reply-To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
| Errors-To: | nobody AT delorie DOT com |
| X-Mailing-List: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
| X-Unsubscribes-To: | listserv AT delorie DOT com |
On Wed, 31 May 2000, Mark E. wrote:
> ! { ".ksh", script_exec, INTERP_FLAG_SKIP_SEARCH},
> ! { ".pl", script_exec, INTERP_FLAG_SKIP_SEARCH}, /* Perl */
> ! { ".sed", script_exec, INTERP_FLAG_SKIP_SEARCH},
> { "", go32_exec },
> { 0, script_exec }, /* every extension not mentioned above calls it */
> { 0, 0 },
Doesn't GCC print a warning about incomplete initialization in the last 3
lines? Even if it doesn't, I think we should initialize the flags to
zero explicitly, like you did with the first few entries.
Other than that, I have no objections.
| webmaster | delorie software privacy |
| Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |