This is the mail archive of the
gcc@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: Should -Wmaybe-uninitialized be included in -Wall?
- From: Jonathan Wakely <jwakely dot gcc at gmail dot com>
- To: Andrew Haley <aph at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Andreas Arnez <arnez at linux dot vnet dot ibm dot com>, "gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org" <gcc at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 13:10:47 +0100
- Subject: Re: Should -Wmaybe-uninitialized be included in -Wall?
- References: <87ehb8rljz dot fsf at br87z6lw dot de dot ibm dot com> <51DBFC32 dot 8050401 at redhat dot com>
On 9 July 2013 13:04, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 07/09/2013 12:59 PM, Andreas Arnez wrote:
>> With this situation at hand, I wonder whether it's a good idea to keep
>> maybe-uninitialized included in -Wall. Projects which have been using
>> "-Wall -Werror" successfully for many years are now forced to
>> investigate non-existing bugs in their code.
>
> But maybe-uninitialized is very useful, and it's not really inappropriate
> for -Wall. I would question the appropriateness of using -Wall -Werror
> in production code.
Me too, but for those who prefer it there is
-Wno-error=maybe-uninitialized so they can keep everything else as an
error.