ksh: unused param in print_expansions()

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

ksh: unused param in print_expansions()

Michael W. Bombardieri-2
Hello,

The local function print_expansions() is a wrapper for
x_print_expansions(). Going back to revision 1.1 of vi.c
reveals the command parameter wasn't used then either.

- Michael


Index: vi.c
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/ksh/vi.c,v
retrieving revision 1.53
diff -u -p -u -r1.53 vi.c
--- vi.c 6 Jan 2018 16:28:58 -0000 1.53
+++ vi.c 11 Jan 2018 09:28:10 -0000
@@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ static void display(char *, char *, int)
 static void ed_mov_opt(int, char *);
 static int expand_word(int);
 static int complete_word(int, int);
-static int print_expansions(struct edstate *, int);
+static int print_expansions(struct edstate *);
 static int char_len(int);
 static void x_vi_zotc(int);
 static void vi_pprompt(int);
@@ -648,7 +648,7 @@ vi_insert(int ch)
  break;
 
  case CTRL('e'):
- print_expansions(es, 0);
+ print_expansions(es);
  break;
 
  case CTRL('i'):
@@ -1125,7 +1125,7 @@ vi_cmd(int argcnt, const char *cmd)
 
  case '=': /* at&t ksh */
  case CTRL('e'): /* Nonstandard vi/ksh */
- print_expansions(es, 1);
+ print_expansions(es);
  break;
 
 
@@ -2052,7 +2052,7 @@ complete_word(int command, int count)
 
  /* Undo previous completion */
  if (command == 0 && expanded == COMPLETE && buf) {
- print_expansions(buf, 0);
+ print_expansions(buf);
  expanded = PRINT;
  return 0;
  }
@@ -2143,7 +2143,7 @@ complete_word(int command, int count)
 }
 
 static int
-print_expansions(struct edstate *e, int command)
+print_expansions(struct edstate *e)
 {
  int nwords;
  int start, end;

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ksh: unused param in print_expansions()

Ingo Schwarze
Hi,

Michael W. Bombardieri wrote on Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 05:37:29PM +0800:

> The local function print_expansions() is a wrapper for
> x_print_expansions(). Going back to revision 1.1 of vi.c
> reveals the command parameter wasn't used then either.

Yes, this patch looks correct and works, and i fail to see what the
extra argument could be used for in the future.

OK?
  Ingo


> Index: vi.c
> ===================================================================
> RCS file: /cvs/src/bin/ksh/vi.c,v
> retrieving revision 1.53
> diff -u -p -u -r1.53 vi.c
> --- vi.c 6 Jan 2018 16:28:58 -0000 1.53
> +++ vi.c 11 Jan 2018 09:28:10 -0000
> @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ static void display(char *, char *, int)
>  static void ed_mov_opt(int, char *);
>  static int expand_word(int);
>  static int complete_word(int, int);
> -static int print_expansions(struct edstate *, int);
> +static int print_expansions(struct edstate *);
>  static int char_len(int);
>  static void x_vi_zotc(int);
>  static void vi_pprompt(int);
> @@ -648,7 +648,7 @@ vi_insert(int ch)
>   break;
>  
>   case CTRL('e'):
> - print_expansions(es, 0);
> + print_expansions(es);
>   break;
>  
>   case CTRL('i'):
> @@ -1125,7 +1125,7 @@ vi_cmd(int argcnt, const char *cmd)
>  
>   case '=': /* at&t ksh */
>   case CTRL('e'): /* Nonstandard vi/ksh */
> - print_expansions(es, 1);
> + print_expansions(es);
>   break;
>  
>  
> @@ -2052,7 +2052,7 @@ complete_word(int command, int count)
>  
>   /* Undo previous completion */
>   if (command == 0 && expanded == COMPLETE && buf) {
> - print_expansions(buf, 0);
> + print_expansions(buf);
>   expanded = PRINT;
>   return 0;
>   }
> @@ -2143,7 +2143,7 @@ complete_word(int command, int count)
>  }
>  
>  static int
> -print_expansions(struct edstate *e, int command)
> +print_expansions(struct edstate *e)
>  {
>   int nwords;
>   int start, end;
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: ksh: unused param in print_expansions()

Theo Buehler-4
On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 11:56:32AM +0100, Ingo Schwarze wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Michael W. Bombardieri wrote on Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 05:37:29PM +0800:
>
> > The local function print_expansions() is a wrapper for
> > x_print_expansions(). Going back to revision 1.1 of vi.c
> > reveals the command parameter wasn't used then either.
>
> Yes, this patch looks correct and works, and i fail to see what the
> extra argument could be used for in the future.
>
> OK?

ok