Following up on Tom's suggestion I am checking in a patch to replace the various

bfd_xxx_set macros with static inline functions, so that we can avoid compile time
warnings about comma expressions with unused values.

	* bfd-in.h (bfd_set_section_vma): Delete.
	(bfd_set_section_alignment): Delete.
	(bfd_set_section_userdata): Delete.
	(bfd_set_cacheable): Delete.
	* bfd.c (bfd_set_cacheable): New static inline function.
	* section.c (bfd_set_section_userdata): Likewise.
	(bfd_set_section_vma): Likewise.
	(bfd_set_section_alignment): Likewise.
	* bfd-in2.h: Regenerate.

1 files changed, 26 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/bfd/section.c b/bfd/section.c
index fb19d8c..a661228 100644
--- a/bfd/section.c
+++ b/bfd/section.c
@@ -542,6 +542,32 @@ CODE_FRAGMENT
 .  int size;
 .};
 .
+.{* Note: the following are provided as inline functions rather than macros
+.   because not all callers use the return value.  A macro implementation
+.   would use a comma expression, eg: "((ptr)->foo = val, TRUE)" and some
+.   compilers will complain about comma expressions that have no effect.  *}
+.static inline bfd_boolean
+.bfd_set_section_userdata (bfd * abfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED, asection * ptr, void * val)
+.{
+.  ptr->userdata = val;
+.  return TRUE;
+.}
+.
+.static inline bfd_boolean
+.bfd_set_section_vma (bfd * abfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED, asection * ptr, bfd_vma val)
+.{
+.  ptr->vma = ptr->lma = val;
+.  ptr->user_set_vma = TRUE;
+.  return TRUE;
+.}
+.
+.static inline bfd_boolean
+.bfd_set_section_alignment (bfd * abfd ATTRIBUTE_UNUSED, asection * ptr, unsigned int val)
+.{
+.  ptr->alignment_power = val;
+.  return TRUE;
+.}
+.
 .{* These sections are global, and are managed by BFD.  The application
 .   and target back end are not permitted to change the values in
 .   these sections.  *}