Re: More on warning cleanup

[Shiz <hi@shiz.me>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 965 bytes --]

> On 28 May 2015, at 07:08, Rich Felker <dalias@libc.org> wrote:
> 
> Since compilers differ in what warnings they include in -Wall, I'd
> like to remove -Wall (followed by a bunch of -Wno-*) from musl's
> --enable-warnings and instead individually turn on the warnings we
> want.

Sounds like a good idea, if only for consistency between compilers.

> One other issue to consider is how to get rid of enabled-by-default
> warnings we don't want. On GCC they're impossible to turn off
> individually, but unobtrusive; only -w can turn them off, but -w is
> permanent and overrides all later -W options. On cparser, a lot of
> crap is turned on by default, but -w turns it off and is then
> overridable by subsequent -W options. Not sure about clang.

clang mimics this behaviour, for what it’s worth. The only thing that
will enable warnings again is -pedantic-errors, which is rather unfortunate.
I presume GCC behaves the same way.

-S



[-- Attachment #2: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 801 bytes --]