Where did the warning go?
John Z. Bohach
jzb2@aexorsyst.com
Wed Feb 25 17:16:00 GMT 2009
On Wednesday 25 February 2009 08:16:23 am Tom St Denis wrote:
> Eivind LM wrote:
<...snip...>
I've been reading this thread, and there is an important point that
hasn't been made yet, or at least I would like to emphasize it if it
has:
Compiler default behavior changes are _REALLY_ annoying. Even when its
done to fix a gcc bug, or for other good reasons, it still causes a lot
of churn either in fixing Makefiles or fixing source code.
I build custom distributions as well as various other s/w for a living,
and just upgrading my toolchain from 4.0.2 to 4.2.2 caused almost half
(of the over 200) purely open-source packages that I build to either
need a patch or upgrade to a new version...and this is especially true
with C++ code.
Those clamoring for default behavior changes should consider that many
(millions, probably) of source packages would likely need modifications
if/when basic default behaviors change. And -Wall changes are as basic
as it gets.
I think it is a legitimate gripe that the warnings with -Wall are not
set in stone already, and sometime change even now, but the solution is
certainly not to change it some more.
However, I recognize that people may want a -Weverything flag, and that
does seem like a reasonable compromise, as that could be used as a
poor-man's splint or other static-analysis tool. I happen to agree
with Tom that lint and such is not a substitute for good programming
practices, but what the heck...if the gcc developers can be convinced
to add a -Weverything, why not. AS LONG AS THE CURRENT DEFAULTS STOP
CHANGING.
More information about the Gcc-help
mailing list