Date: Wed, 30 Dec 2009 07:22:36 +0100 From: Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl> To: Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@FreeBSD.org> Cc: svn-src-head@freebsd.org, svn-src-all@freebsd.org, src-committers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: svn commit: r201227 - in head: sbin/comcontrol sbin/mount sbin/mount_msdosfs sbin/mount_nullfs sbin/rcorder usr.bin/find usr.bin/gencat usr.bin/mklocale usr.sbin/config usr.sbin/cpucontrol usr.sbin... Message-ID: <20091230062236.GI64905@hoeg.nl> In-Reply-To: <4B3AA7DC.1040606@FreeBSD.org> References: <200912292253.nBTMrR5m038869@svn.freebsd.org> <4B3AA7DC.1040606@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[-- Attachment #1 --] Hi Gabor, * Gabor Kovesdan <gabor@FreeBSD.org> wrote: > I wonder if it would be worth to invent a WARNS=7 level, which would > be WARNS=6 + ANSI. Although ANSI-conformance isn't a -Wfoo flag, > which is WARNS for but conforming ANSI means a higher level > cleannes, which is demanded, so I think it wouldn't really > contradict to the semantics of WARNS. So far I've been using -Wold-style-definition, which I've been using make these changes. I am planning on just adding that to WARNS=6, considering that almost all the code at WARNS=6 builds with this flag enabled now. I'd rather not add a WARNS=7, because then I'm afraid almost nobody will know about its existence, causing it to be mostly ignored. In an ideal world, I think we should get rid of WARNS. We could just enable all -W flags by default, except -Werror. That way people would be invited to fix the warnings over time. -- Ed Schouten <ed@80386.nl> WWW: http://80386.nl/ [-- Attachment #2 --] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (FreeBSD) iEUEARECAAYFAks68asACgkQ52SDGA2eCwUY1gCfZ1+AHZn2eYCBTzCEHp2TnfM+ /r8Al2c55mx66BqOWIMXr1og2m+koHs= =J67I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20091230062236.GI64905>