Jason Kraftcheck wrote: > This makes it *very* easy to miss potential important compiler warnings > and such in all the noise.
I have heard this infrequently from posters but I don't experience this myself and here is why. I think I will go out on a limb and say that most (many?) developers use automated tools to walk through every warning and every error output from the compilers when building their projects. Because of this I find it unlikely that anyone doing this would miss a warning or an error. In fact because of this warnings are an extra annoyance and will usually get fixed. (Even without -Werror.) My personal tool of choice for this is emacs. But before you balk at that (because if not then you would not have been asking your question) let me say that surely vim, kdevelop, or other IDEs also have capabilities in this area. Instead of trying to hide useful output from the build process let me suggest instead that you investigate using an improved IDE to build and develop your project. An IDE that walks through the warnings and errors removes much of the drudgery. I highly recommend this. Barring this I would use gcc's -Werror option to make all warnings into errors. This way warnings will not be missed. But I realize that you said this was a legacy application. Cleaning up a legacy application to be completely warning free can be a challenging process. I am facing that prospect (again) myself right now. Just my two cents... Bob
