Re: Joy with new GCC 3.3 warnings -- HTF to shut them up?

[Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr at integrable-solutions dot net>]

"David O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org> writes:

| On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 11:06:33AM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
| > On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 10:47:09AM -0700, Richard Henderson wrote:
| > > On Thu, May 01, 2003 at 09:17:10AM -0700, Joe Buck wrote:
| > > > (in that there doesn't appear to be a
| > > > way to write a conforming C program that uses this standard means of
| > > > getting a version identifier into the object file without producing a
| > > > warning).
| > > 
| > > You forgot to add "and using -Wall".  The warning is not
| > > produced with no "give me extra warnings" options.
| > 
| > -Wall has become de-facto standard, and one of my roles over the last
| > decade or so has been to try to keep it that way (getting warnings taken
| > out of -Wall if they can't be suppressed without either excessive pain
| > or making the code worse).
| 
| It seems -Wall has also grown -Wsign-compare.  Much FreeBSD's /usr/src
| that was GCC 3.2.2 -Wall -Werror clean now produce tons of:
| 
|     "warning: signed and unsigned type in conditional expression"
| 
| was it really the intention that -Wall grow so many new warnings?

I think BSD is being bitten by the fuzzy logic around -Wall.

  1) as its name does not suggest, it does not turn on all warnings;

  2) There is no well formed, clear stated, widely accepted criteria
     to apply when considering a warning-switch as candidate for -Wall

-- Gaby