Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1999 18:10:59 +1030 From: Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> To: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> Cc: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com>, Garrett Wollman <wollman@khavrinen.lcs.mit.edu>, chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: -Wall (was: btokup() macro in sys/malloc.h) Message-ID: <19990128181059.C8473@freebie.lemis.com> In-Reply-To: <199901280540.WAA26288@mt.sri.com>; from Nate Williams on Wed, Jan 27, 1999 at 10:40:16PM -0700
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[moved to -chat] On Wednesday, 27 January 1999 at 22:40:16 -0700, Nate Williams wrote: >> Anyway, if we're going to -Wall'ify the kernel (as we should) >> then we need to update sytle(9) to reflect that. >> >> In fact, style(9) should say: >> >> If at all possible, your code should compile without warnings >> when the gcc -Wall flag is given. > > I disagree. As has been shown many times in the past (and I suspect the > down-under constituent will show that at least a couple of the > '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. It works both ways. On the one hand, I hate having to put dummy initialization in for variables that never get used uninitialized, but in ways that the optimizer can't recognize. On the other hand, just today (or yesterday, depending on how you look at it), Matt Dillon changed some stuff in vinum to remove some warnings, and at the same time coincidentally fixed a latent bug. Greg -- See complete headers for address, home page and phone numbers finger grog@lemis.com for PGP public key To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19990128181059.C8473>