Hello,
On Sep 25 21:02 Olaf Meeuwissen wrote (excerpt):
I'm just chiming in to make a point to the list in general here. Nothing personal ;-)
Perfectly o.k. - and I fully agree with your findings. Many thanks for your real test!
In the mean time, I think we should any code that is flagged as -Wunsequenced (by clang) or -Wsequence-point (by gcc).
I assume the meaning is clear but there is an omission. What exactly should be done with such code?
the (self-invented?) AWARE principle: All Warnings Are Really Errors
I cannot agree more. It happened to me more than once that "this stupid compiler shows me one of its stupid warnings" but after looking a bit closer - how embarassing - that "stupid compiler" was even smarter than me ;-) It even happened to me once that a warning had actually pointed out a fundamental flaw in the design. In other words: When something is not 100% clear/clean for the compiler, it is actually not clear/clean. Kind regards and have a nice weekend! Johannes Meixner -- SUSE LINUX GmbH - GF: Felix Imendoerffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton - HRB 21284 (AG Nuernberg) -- sane-devel mailing list: sane-devel@lists.alioth.debian.org http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sane-devel Unsubscribe: Send mail with subject "unsubscribe your_password" to sane-devel-requ...@lists.alioth.debian.org
