Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1999 13:24:53 -0800 (PST) From: Archie Cobbs <archie@whistle.com> To: mike@smith.net.au (Mike Smith) Cc: eivind@FreeBSD.ORG, luigi@labinfo.iet.unipi.it, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/sys/netinet ip_input.c Message-ID: <199901122124.NAA07208@bubba.whistle.com> In-Reply-To: <199901121921.LAA05046@dingo.cdrom.com> from Mike Smith at "Jan 12, 99 11:21:31 am"
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Mike Smith writes: > > Unless good counter-arguments spring forward, -Werror is going in > > shortly, so tolerating the warnings is not an option. > > -Werror is anal fluff. I applaud it being the default for general > usage, but -Werror made working on NetBSD *extremely* difficult. > Stamping out warnings is desirable, but sometimes the crud in the code > required to do it is worse than the warning. This is not a counter-argument, only a report from my personal experience. To me the gcc warnings are *essential* to producing bug-free code in a timely manner. Therefore, getting to -Werror is a good goal. While there are weird corner cases where a warning may be unavoidable, gcc provides mechanisms to deal with these (like our __dead and __unused). So IMHO it's pretty vanishingly rare that -Werror is impossible to achieve. -Archie ___________________________________________________________________________ Archie Cobbs * Whistle Communications, Inc. * http://www.whistle.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901122124.NAA07208>