From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <alexander.turenko@tarantool.org>
Received: from smtp59.i.mail.ru (smtp59.i.mail.ru [217.69.128.39])
 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by dev.tarantool.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7B89B469710
 for <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>;
 Mon,  8 Jun 2020 14:36:17 +0300 (MSK)
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 2020 14:36:02 +0300
From: Alexander Turenko <alexander.turenko@tarantool.org>
Message-ID: <20200608113602.kv4ibhbvfft25m3u@tkn_work_nb>
References: <20200605140125.25329-1-sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
 <20200608112213.hf4fjwwikct74qab@tkn_work_nb>
 <3373c95d-5653-9a7c-e6f3-cc46594a0e57@tarantool.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <3373c95d-5653-9a7c-e6f3-cc46594a0e57@tarantool.org>
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH] decimal: fix build with GCC 10
List-Id: Tarantool development patches <tarantool-patches.dev.tarantool.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/options/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.tarantool.org/pipermail/tarantool-patches/>
List-Post: <mailto:tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.tarantool.org/mailman/listinfo/tarantool-patches>, 
 <mailto:tarantool-patches-request@dev.tarantool.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Serge Petrenko <sergepetrenko@tarantool.org>
Cc: tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org

On Mon, Jun 08, 2020 at 02:30:43PM +0300, Serge Petrenko wrote:
> 
> 08.06.2020 14:22, Alexander Turenko пишет:
> > The patch itself is okay.
> > 
> > On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 05:01:25PM +0300, Serge Petrenko wrote:
> > > GCC 10 produces the following error:
> > > cc1: warning: function may return address of local variable [-Wreturn-local-addr]
> > > 
> > > Fix it.
> > It would be good to mention whether it is a real problem or
> > false-positive. (The patch is already pushed, so this comment is just
> > for information.)
> 
> 
> It's a false-positive. The return value  is  only  used to test `dec !=
> NULL`.
> 
> `dec == NULL` means an error.So, no UB here.
> 
> I guess no need for a changelog entry then.

Ouch, I see. Disregard so.