From owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG  Mon Oct 17 22:40:39 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-toolchain@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org
Received: from mandree.no-ip.org (freefall.freebsd.org
	[IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::28])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 73535106566B
	for <freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org>;
	Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:40:39 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from mandree@FreeBSD.org)
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by apollo.emma.line.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A244123CF84
	for <freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org>;
	Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:28:42 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4E9CAC1A.5040709@FreeBSD.org>
Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2011 00:28:42 +0200
From: Matthias Andree <mandree@FreeBSD.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US;
	rv:1.9.2.23) Gecko/20110922 Mnenhy/0.8.3 Thunderbird/3.1.15
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org
References: <20111017152548.GA66978@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <20111017152548.GA66978@freebsd.org>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.2
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: disable -Wtautological-compare for clang
X-BeenThere: freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Maintenance of FreeBSD's integrated toolchain
	<freebsd-toolchain.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-toolchain>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-toolchain@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-toolchain>, 
	<mailto:freebsd-toolchain-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 22:40:39 -0000

Am 17.10.2011 17:25, schrieb Alexander Best:

> any chance we could disable -Wtautological-compare for clang? i don't think
> comparing an unsigned int against < 0 is worth a warning. actually it's always
> nice to have such a seatbelt, in case somebody changes the type to int and
> forgets to introduce such a check.

If your code must be unclean in such a way that it uses deliberately
dead code "just in case someone breaks the semantics", can you not use
-Wno-tautological-compare in that situation?

Unless someone goes to paranoia mode and sprays unneeded checks like you
suggest all over the code like an ugly graffity, all such warnings are
worth investigating.  In code I've hand my eyes and/or hands on, the
better part of these warnings were pointing to true bugs.

So, objection.