Should -Wmaybe-uninitialized be included in -Wall?

[Ryan Hill]

On Wed, 10 Jul 2013 07:49:18 -0500
Gabriel Dos Reis <gdr@integrable-solutions.net> wrote:

> If we include a warning in -Wall then it is because we believe it to be
> generally useful and likely to uncover common bugs/mistakes.  It is therefore
> reasonable for users to issue -Wall -Werror even in application delivery mode.

Arg, no.  -Werror is very useful for development and I'm sure that code
quality increases because of it, but it should never be enabled by default for
releases.  I think about 80% of the bugs we've had filed so far for packages
failing to build against 4.8 are due to -Werror.  Also, several distros patch
gcc to enable additional warnings by default (eg. Debian, Ubuntu, and Gentoo
enable -Wformat=security) that upstream may not see or be interested in. It's a
big enough headache that we had to ban use of -Werror from our tree (instead we
flag important warnings and output them at the end of the build).


-- 
Ryan Hill                        psn: dirtyepic_sk
   gcc-porting/toolchain/wxwidgets @ gentoo.org

47C3 6D62 4864 0E49 8E9E  7F92 ED38 BD49 957A 8463
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 490 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://gcc.gnu.org/pipermail/gcc/attachments/20130711/9b3b1fe2/attachment.sig>