RE: Suppressing specific compiler warnings

["Banibrata Dutta" <dutta at india dot hp dot com>]

Hi,

Thanks to you all for all the suggestions like...
 i) DIY
ii) pay to contributor
etc.

Both make perfect sense, but what I understand from all the
mails is that this is a well-understood and well-thought of
issue, and obviously at the pit's bottom in the well-of-priorites :(

Inspite of this I think I owe a few clarifications:

1) Numbers are harder to remember for humans. Agreed. But I didn't
mean numbers alone, but Numbers "plus" Textual explanation of the
warning or error. It's like the ease of using real array indices or
working with associative arrays... Here, all I am saying is that to
a typical "C" programmer, arrays with integer indices may be simpler!!
(just the simple me).

2) The way numbers help internationalization is that you could have
something like:

wchar*  warning_message[MAX_LANGS][MAX_WARNINGS];

populated with something like...

warning_message[LANG_EN][UNUSED_VAR]       = "Unused variable";
warning_message[LANG_FR][UNUSED_VAR]       = "Variable inutilisée";
..
warning_message[LANG_EN][STMT_NOT_REACHED] = "Statement not reached";
warning_message[LANG_FR][STMT_NOT_REACHED] = "Rapport non atteint";
..

and based on your internationalization setting i.e. current_lang == LANG_EN
(english) or == LANG_FR (french), automatically the correct warning is
displayed, in the following format...

printf("Warning %d: %s\n", warn_num,
warning_message[current_lang][warn_num]);


that's it.

As for the "Kid DIY"... I am seriously giving it a thought, but i need
to understand that proposal present no danger to the sanity and usability
of the code, for this i need "big bro's"... Anybody listening ?!

Thanks & regards,
Banibrata Dutta

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Phil Edwards [mailto:phil@codesourcery.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2004 12:20 AM
> To: llewelly@xmission.com
> Cc: Banibrata Dutta; 'Ranjit Mathew'; gcc@gcc.gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Suppressing specific compiler warnings
> 
> 
> [I'm on the list, please don't cc me.]
> 
> 
> On Wed, May 26, 2004 at 01:17:36PM -0600, llewelly@xmission.com wrote:
> > > 
> > > And then have option like -Wno-<number>... Something quite similar
> > > to the HP compilers!
> > 
> > Numbers are for computers. Names for people. A generalization,
> >     but I am opposed to numbering warning kinds, on the
> >     grounds that numbers tend to be harder to remember. If you are
> >     reading a makefile, and you see -Wno-1492, you have no clue why,
> >     but if you see -Wno-unused you know what is going on.
> 
> I tend to agree.
> 
> 
> > > Also, this would make the process of internationalization 
> of gcc/g++ 
> > > easy.
> > 
> > Pardon my ignorance, but how so?
> 
> With numbers, the only string that needs to be translated is 
> "no-".  With names, they /all/ need meaningful translations.
> 
> I still think names would be more appropriate.
> 
> 
> Phil
> 
> -- 
> Behind everything some further thing is found, forever; thus 
> the tree behind the bird, stone beneath soil, the sun behind 
> Urth.  Behind our efforts, let there be found our efforts.
>               - Ascian saying, as related by Loyal to the 
> Group of Seventeen
>