This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: New testcase (compare2.c) for bogus -Wsign-compare warnings
- To: aoliva at cygnus dot com
- Subject: Re: New testcase (compare2.c) for bogus -Wsign-compare warnings
- From: "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi at caip dot rutgers dot edu>
- Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 15:01:37 -0400 (EDT)
- Cc: egcs-patches at egcs dot cygnus dot com
> From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@cygnus.com>
>
> On Apr 6, 2000, "Kaveh R. Ghazi" <ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu> wrote:
>
> > But I'm hoping a testcase might inspire someone. :-)
>
> :-)
>
> Since there's no immediate fix in the foreseeable future, it might be
> nice to mark the failing cases as `xfail's, so that others don't think
> it's a regression.
Then it wouldn't be very "inspiring" now would it? :-)
BTW, new testcases are not regressions, IMHO.
> That's the policy for C++, but not for C, so maybe
> it doesn't apply here. But then, it's not like it's a high-priority
> bug...
Well, any time a warning flag generates tons of spurious messages, it
becomes ignored/useless. I'm trying to avoid that.
Actually, I think I can get the ?: ones without too much trouble.
Stay tuned...
--
Kaveh R. Ghazi Engagement Manager / Project Services
ghazi@caip.rutgers.edu Qwest Internet Solutions