On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 22:06, Richard Quadling <rquadl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 23 July 2011 17:16, Antony Dovgal <t...@daylessday.org> wrote:
>> Thanks Nuno, great job!
>>
>> On 07/23/2011 08:03 PM, Nuno Lopes wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> Thanks to Nexcess, we have a new wonderful machine for http://gcov.php.net
>>> up and running.
>>> This new machine is running linux 64 bits, so expect a few differences in
>>> the test results.
>>>
>>> I believe most things are ported from the old machine, including all
>>> daemon's configurations.
>>> I fired an experimental run of the cron job. Please help me by reporting
>>> extensions that are not enabled, daemons that are misconfigured and why
>>> (and
>>> therefore some tests are failing or skiping), missing valgrind
>>> suppressions,
>>> and so on.
>>>
>>> Thanks to Nexcess for offering a new machine to replace the old one.
>>>
>>> Nuno
>
> Excellent work.
>
> I see from the recent report that there are a LOT of similar warnings.
> I'm guessing that those warnings, whilst they are generated on a linux
> x64 box, would be the same for win32 (and anything else).
>
> What sort of policy is needed in addressing casting warnings like
> this. I get a LOT of warnings about casting of doubles/floats to
> ints/longs, along with the potential for potential data loss.
>
> How feasible is it to aim for a 100% warning free build? I'm not
> meaning that we should suppress the warnings.

I have vague memories from last year when a person tried to offer a
patch to initialize all structs "properly"..
It was semi-rejected, but if a person with karma to commit would take
it upon herself to commit such patch, I doubt it will be rejected.

A person without a proven repletion for karma to php-src posting such
patch posting it, is however massive work to review (read; _major_
work to review all edge cases) and will probably be ignored/rejected.

-Hannes

-- 
PHP Internals - PHP Runtime Development Mailing List
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php

Reply via email to