[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       spamassassin-users
Subject:    Re: Not sure if this is old or new
From:       Simon Loewenthal <simon () klunky ! co ! uk>
Date:       2011-09-22 9:14:59
Message-ID: 4E7AFC93.8080105 () klunky ! co ! uk
[Download RAW message or body]

On 09/22/2011 10:59 AM, Nigel Frankcom wrote:
> On Wed, 21 Sep 2011 17:08:42 +0200, Matus UHLAR - fantomas
> <uhlar@fantomas.sk> wrote:
>
>> On 20.09.11 18:57, Nigel Frankcom wrote:
>>> I moved SA to a newer box and have the following output in my logs:
>>> http://pastebin.com/VvZfXwAC
>>>
>>> Apologies if I'm being dense, but is there a way to trace what may be
>>> causing this, not the specifics of parentheses or == but the
>>> particular rule?
>>>
>>> All (printable) help gratefully received.
>>
>> #
>> Compile was succesful. Restarting spamd
>> #
>> Stopping spamd: [  OK  ]
>> #
>> Starting spamd: [  OK  ]
>>
>> I don't see your problem.
> Lines 46 to 63. I am guessing one of my rules has an issue, Wondering
> if there is a way to figure out which rule is triggering this.
>
> body_0.xs: In function
> 'XS_Mail__SpamAssassin__CompiledRegexps__body_0_scan':
> body_0.xs:123: warning: suggest parentheses around assignment used as
> truth value
>
I don't think that this is anything to fret about.  Probably some code
that uses an assignment = {}, but often is a typo for something else

eg.

if (a = b) {...}
This is correct but sometimes the programmer might mean
if (a == b) {...}
Its pointing out a possible confusion.
The warning is pointing out that he might want the latter.
As I have demonstrated above, Google is yours and mine friend ;)

My programming is poor, so I am certain someone will point out whether I
am wrong or right.

-- 
	Email  simon AT klunky DOT co DOT uk   
	PGP is optional: 4BA78604
	I won't accept your confidentiality
	agreement, and your Emails are kept.
      		       ~Ö¿Ö~

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]