On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 03:21:38PM +0000, Simon Cozens wrote: > On Mon, Dec 31, 2001 at 09:50:08AM -0500, Dan Sugalski wrote: > > I committed a patch yesterday that forces -Wall for gcc builds. If that's > > not cranky enough, give me a list of more gcc switches and I'll add 'em > > into the list.
> I'd be very tempted to throw -Werror on there as well, just to force > the issue a little. This is *not* a good idea. The problem is that not all warnings are your own fault :) I have seen a lot of examples where a missing prototype or redefinition in OS headers results in a compile-time warning, and -Werror would definately be the wrong thing then. You should use -Werror only if you're afraid of not seeing stderr messages from gcc, or want gcc to stop compiling at the first error to avoid the usual cascade of weird, seemingly incorrect errors. :) -Wall good, -Werror bad. -pedantic could clash with any gcc-specific code such as the calculated-goto. -- Thomas Wouters <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Hi! I'm a .signature virus! copy me into your .signature file to help me spread!
