From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1OSqUL-0004hp-CB for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 11:57:29 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id C1D8CE09D7; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 11:57:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D2B0EE0979 for ; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 11:57:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 81BCF1B4085 for ; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 11:57:04 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.959 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.959 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.360, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id d9B4Rnlzl7dg for ; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 11:56:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C7E941B408D for ; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 11:56:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OSqTl-0000HQ-0p for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:56:53 +0200 Received: from athedsl-373417.home.otenet.gr ([79.131.10.167]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:56:53 +0200 Received: from realnc by athedsl-373417.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 27 Jun 2010 13:56:53 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: FYI: Rules for distro-friendly packages Date: Sun, 27 Jun 2010 14:56:57 +0300 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: References: <20100625201738.GA4789@nibiru.local> <4C252C8E.8020408@gentoo.org> <20100626193915.GD4789@nibiru.local> <20100626205001.365b51cb@snowcone> <20100626195733.GF4789@nibiru.local> <20100626211254.002784d4@snowcone> <20100627104724.GC23460@nibiru.local> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-373417.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.4) Gecko/20100626 Thunderbird/3.1 In-Reply-To: <20100627104724.GC23460@nibiru.local> X-Archives-Salt: a3b96c99-ce43-4b35-a921-f72a3e7647de X-Archives-Hash: 53eec157da1ff1391dd9f48ad8b02621 On 06/27/2010 01:47 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote: > * Nikos Chantziaras schrieb: > >> Did it actually occur to anyone that warnings are not errors? You can >> have them for correct code. A warning means you might want to look at >> the code to check whether there's some real error there. It doesn't >> mean the code is broken. > > In my personal experience, most times a warning comes it, the > code *is* broken (but *might* work in most situations). That's the key to it: most times. Granted, without -Wall (or any other options that tweaks the default warning level) we can be very sure that the warning is the result of a mistake by the developer. But with -Wall, many warnings are totally not interesting ("unused parameter") and some even try to outsmart the programmer even though he/she knows better ("taking address of variable declared register"). In that last example, fixing it would even be wrong when you consider the optimizer and the fuzzy meaning of "register" which the compiler is totally free to ignore.