This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Should -Wjump-misses-init be in -Wall?
On Sat, Jun 20, 2009 at 6:50 AM, James Dennett<james.dennett@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I think it is a bad idea to include it in -Wall. You fixed 3 warnings in
>> gcc and I fixed 1 in binutils. If you have thousands of packages in C,
>> -Wall may generate hundreds of warnings.
>
> The same is true of any new -Wall warning that applies to existing
> code, but we must not let that stop us improving -Wall, even when
> existing code generates some (acceptable) level of false positives.
The code is perfectly valid C. This warning provides no additional
useful information which -Wuninitialized doesn't provide.
>> It will make gcc 4.5.0
>> unusable to those people.
>
> Can you justify that claim? ?How does getting warnings about
> questionable code constructs render a compiler "unusable"?
>
If you have thousands of packages, investigate many false
positive errors may not be feasible on top of many other real
issues in gcc and packages.
--
H.J.