Hi Ronald, Am 17.10.2016 um 21:37 schrieb Ronald S. Bultje: > Hi Michael, > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Michael Behrisch <o...@behrisch.de> > wrote: > >> Am 17.10.2016 um 15:29 schrieb Michael Niedermayer: >>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 01:34:55PM +0200, wm4 wrote: >>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:09:36 +0200 Michael Niedermayer >>>> <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote: >>>> >>> this is about a cosmetic change having no real technical effect >> >> So here are my cosmetics for libavutil. It simply helps with >> keeping track of real warnings in downstream projects. > > > Why are you using -Wpedantic?
My main reason is that we are compiling with different compilers for different platforms and -Wpedantic at least promises to keep the code closer to the standard and thus better transferable. I never tested whether this is actually true, but I like the fact that the project currently compiles with gcc, clang and msvc and welcome every tool and option that helps me to keep it this way. See also here: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2855121/what-is-the-purpose-of-using-pedantic-in-gcc-g-compiler > > Most people use warnings as a way for the compiler to inform them of > potential bugs in their code; has -Wpedantic ever helped you find > bugs? I cannot think of any but to be honest I cannot even tell exactly which warnings are enabled by which of the -Wall, -Wextra and -Wpedantic flags and it is surprisingly hard to find out. Best regards, Michael
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel
