Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 23:20:06 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: John Birrell <jb@cimlogic.com.au> Cc: nate@mt.sri.com (Nate Williams), archie@whistle.com, wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu, current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: btokup() macro in sys/malloc.h Message-ID: <199901280620.XAA26671@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <199901280558.QAA07918@cimlogic.com.au> References: <199901280540.WAA26288@mt.sri.com> <199901280558.QAA07918@cimlogic.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > 'warnings' fixes will be wrong and hide bogus code), making -Wall a goal > > causes people to cover up bad code with bad casts and such. > > > > '-Wall' is *NOT* a good design goal. > > Fixing warnings with bad casts is a problem, sure, but asking people > to write code without casts (if possible) that will compile cleanly with > -Wall is a reasonable thing to ask IMO. Agreed. But most of the new code written does indeed compile with -Wall. It's the code we've 'inherited' that doesn't. > In my experience, the resulting > code tends to be more portable across architectures with different > pointer/long sizes and endian-ness. This is where I disagree. Too often people cast away the bugs and end up with overflow and sign problems. Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901280620.XAA26671>