Re: __attribute__((warn_unused_result)) for NetBSD?

>> Anyways, for the most part all common usages of close don't need
>> warnings about missing the return value that I can see.
> I personally disagree.  The following is much more robust approach.

You make it sound as though those are related.

Your approach may be more robust (though you don't say what this is
supposed to be robust against, making it hard to evaluate), but it may
still be true that for the most part all common usages of close don't
need warnings about missing the return value.

Common uses of close are typically in code that is not paranoid about
errors and doesn't really care enough to, for example, even check the
return values from fprintf.  As such, those programs don't need to
bother with the level of robustness you appear to be advocating.

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML		[email protected]
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B