On Thu, Apr 5, 2012 at 5:29 AM, Arnaud Charlet <char...@adacore.com> wrote: >> Well, if you write code so obvious that -Wuninitialized is annoying then: > > No, the code is certainly not obvious, and improving -Wuninitialized although > a nice goal is likely to require lots of effort, likely at the expense of > removing some useful warnings. > >> either the implementation of -Wuninitialized should be improved, or as you > > You can't have it both ways: either -Wuninitialized is indeed improved to the > point where it generates almost no false positives, and then enabling it > by default should be considered/done; or -Wuninitialized does generate > false positives and enabling it by default is likely not a good idea.
*I* do not think that the false positives of -Wuninitialized are so frequent that it can't or should not be enabled by default; you are making that argument. And I am saying *if* you what you say is true, then... Note the conditional. > > Same for -Wmaybe-uninitialized, also part of -Wall. > >> are so expert that you can add -Wno-uninitialized. I think the argument >> cuts both ways. > > Who said anything about being "so expert"? IMO that's precisely non > experts who will get the most annoyed here, because they may not understand > why the warning is generated, nor how to disable it. If it is the non-expert that would be caught in code so non-obvious that -Wuninitialized would trip into false positives, then it is highly likely that the code might in fact contain an error. > And IMO, a discussion about a "default" is certainly NOT about experts, Full agreed. > it's precisely a discussion about what would be the best default for most > people (and most people are not experts). agreed. I don't see why we are arguing :-) -- Gaby
