This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: pointer <-> integer round-up
- From: dewar at gnat dot com (Robert Dewar)
- To: Joe dot Buck at synopsys dot com, apl at alum dot mit dot edu
- Cc: dewar at gnat dot com, fjh at cs dot mu dot OZ dot AU, gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org, lord at emf dot net
- Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2002 21:16:44 -0500 (EST)
- Subject: Re: pointer <-> integer round-up
<<I would agree with Alan if the rule were stated in a somewhat weaker way:
if there is a warning that is included in -Wall, for any program that
produces a warning, it should be possible to modify the program to
eliminate the warning without making the program significantly worse in
performance or size. An example of a warning that doesn't meet that
criterion are the "effective C++" warnings that insist that some classes
have a virtual destructor when this is unnecessary, which adds unnecessary
time and space overhead to programs.
>>
Just to be clear, I absolutely agree with the above.
The issue is whether there has to be *portable* way to guarantee no warnings
on *any* target. I don't see that as necessary for warnings that are of the
kind that may vary from one target to another.