This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the GCC project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: "introduce no new bootstrap warning" criteria. was: Loop iv debugging, patch

>>>>> Kaveh R Ghazi writes:

 > My point is that -Werror requires *every* platform to have zero
 > warnings.  I think we could get *some* platforms down to zero, but its
 > not possible to get *all* of them IMHO.
I agree.

For reference, here're the current numbers on i686-linux with glibc
2.2 (after applying a patch of mine that I'll send separatly):

Counting all warnings,
there are 254 warnings in stage3 of this bootstrap.

Number of warnings per file:
     56	gcc/combine.c
     42	gcc/expr.c
     22	gcc/config/i386/i386.c
     20	gcc/reg-stack.c
     12	gcc/loop.c
     12	gcc/cp/pt.c
     10	gcc/cse.c
     10	gcc/cp/error.c
      6	gcc/reload1.c
      6	gcc/gcc.c
      4	hashtab.c
      4	gcc/reload.c
      4	gcc/regmove.c
      4	gcc/real.c
      4	gcc/libgcc2.c
      4	gcc/function.c
      4	gcc/fold-const.c
      4	gcc/cp/call.c
      4	gcc/alias.c
      2	gcc/sched-deps.c
      2	gcc/objc/lang-specs.h
      2	gcc/final.c
      2	gcc/f/lang-specs.h
      2	gcc/expmed.c
      2	gcc/dwarfout.c
      2	gcc/dwarf2out.c
      2	gcc/cp/lang-specs.h
      2	gcc/cp/init.c
      2	gcc/cp/errfn.c
      2	gcc/c-lex.c

Number of warning types:
    156	comparison between signed and unsigned
     20	`???' might be used uninitialized in this function
     14	unused variable `???'
     14	signed and unsigned type in conditional expression
     12	string length `???' is greater than the minimum length `???' ISO C89 is required to support
     10	initialization from incompatible pointer type
      8	function declaration isn't a prototype
      6	`???' defined but not used
      2	unused parameter `???'
      2	pointer targets in passing arg ??? of `???' differ in signedness
      2	passing arg ??? of `???' discards qualifiers from pointer target type
      2	no previous prototype for `???'
      2	integer constant is unsigned in ISO C, signed with -traditional
      2	function-like macro `strcmp' must be used with arguments in traditional C
      2	decimal constant is so large that it is unsigned

The libgcc2.c warnigns might be fixed now with Richard Kenner's patch
and I'm looking into i386.c now.

 Andreas Jaeger
  SuSE Labs

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]