Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>