Re: RFC: warnings on ignoring return value on some list operations

[Tim Janik <timj imendio com>]

On Thu, 1 Dec 2005, Alexander Larsson wrote:

> On Fri, 2005-11-25 at 07:11 -0500, Owen Taylor wrote:
>
> > The GList API isn't an opaque abstract data structure; it's a a set of
> > well-defined operations on list nodes. It would not be OK to change the
> > g_list_append() operation to modify the list in some different way,
> > no matter what is documented. (The API existed 3-4 years before the
> > docs after all.)
>
> I'm not sure what the status is here. I think my patch is mostly OK with
> respect to what Owen says. Do we want to commit it, or should I change
> it somehow?

i think the last word no that discussion was:

> unless you strongly object to it, i still think we should add the attribute to
> all list functions that can return modified lists. it'll be stricter and thus
> may require some adaptions when introduced, but better in the long-term because
> it helps people to avoid easy errors.

and there were no strong objections after that. so it'd be nice if you provided
a patch that covered all list functions. i think that can get commit approval
right away then.

---
ciaoTJ