openssh unix dev - Jun 2021 - [PATCH v2 2/2] Remove trailing semicolon after RB_GENERATE_STATIC

thanks - applied as e76069191

On Thu, 13 May 2021, Michael Forney wrote:
> This expands to a series of function definitions, so the semicolon is
> not necessary (in fact, it is not allowed in ISO C).
> ---
>  krl.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/krl.c b/krl.c
> index 5612e774..c75279f9 100644
> --- a/krl.c
> +++ b/krl.c
> @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ struct revoked_serial {
>  };
>  static int serial_cmp(struct revoked_serial *a, struct revoked_serial *b);
>  RB_HEAD(revoked_serial_tree, revoked_serial);
> -RB_GENERATE_STATIC(revoked_serial_tree, revoked_serial, tree_entry,
serial_cmp);
> +RB_GENERATE_STATIC(revoked_serial_tree, revoked_serial, tree_entry,
serial_cmp)
>  
>  /* Tree of key IDs */
>  struct revoked_key_id {
> @@ -70,7 +70,7 @@ struct revoked_key_id {
>  };
>  static int key_id_cmp(struct revoked_key_id *a, struct revoked_key_id *b);
>  RB_HEAD(revoked_key_id_tree, revoked_key_id);
> -RB_GENERATE_STATIC(revoked_key_id_tree, revoked_key_id, tree_entry,
key_id_cmp);
> +RB_GENERATE_STATIC(revoked_key_id_tree, revoked_key_id, tree_entry,
key_id_cmp)
>  
>  /* Tree of blobs (used for keys and fingerprints) */
>  struct revoked_blob {
> @@ -80,7 +80,7 @@ struct revoked_blob {
>  };
>  static int blob_cmp(struct revoked_blob *a, struct revoked_blob *b);
>  RB_HEAD(revoked_blob_tree, revoked_blob);
> -RB_GENERATE_STATIC(revoked_blob_tree, revoked_blob, tree_entry, blob_cmp);
> +RB_GENERATE_STATIC(revoked_blob_tree, revoked_blob, tree_entry, blob_cmp)
>  
>  /* Tracks revoked certs for a single CA */
>  struct revoked_certs {
> -- 
> 2.31.1
> 
> _______________________________________________
> openssh-unix-dev mailing list
> openssh-unix-dev at mindrot.org
> https://lists.mindrot.org/mailman/listinfo/openssh-unix-dev
>

On Thu, 13 May 2021, Michael Forney wrote:
> This expands to a series of function definitions, so the semicolon is
> not necessary (in fact, it is not allowed in ISO C).
I went looking for that, and failed to find it.? The best I could find 
says otherwise.? ISO/IEC 9899:2017 (C17): Section 6.8.3 Expression and 
null statements specifically allows a null statement (as you'd expect 
given the section name).

It must be a new revision.? When did the null statement become 
disallowed?? Reference, please.

If the null statements are still allowed, I urge that the patch be 
reverted as it would then be mere noise in the change history, a 
distraction at best, and a source of errors at worst.

The benefit of the semi-colon (if allowed) is that it makes explicit 
that the macro is a psuedo-statement.? Also, if the macro is redefined 
to produce an expression that is not a (terminated) statement, the 
program will no longer compile.

In case you hadn't noticed, I look unfavourably on trivial, janitorial 
patches.