On 26/08/2017 17:56, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2017.08.26 at 17:18 +0200, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>
>> On 26/08/2017 13:10, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
>>> On 2017.08.26 at 13:04 +0200, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>>
On 26/08/2017 13:10, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote:
> On 2017.08.26 at 13:04 +0200, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I have been trying to build the llvm toolchain with gcc 7.2 using the
>> Debian packages.
>> However, it is currently failing with some undefi
Hello,
I have been trying to build the llvm toolchain with gcc 7.2 using the
Debian packages.
However, it is currently failing with some undefined reference.
Seems that some symbols are removed during the build phase (too strong
optim?)
I haven't seen something relevant to this in the gcc release
Over the last few weeks, working with Jonathan, I have been running
daily analysis of Coverity (a proprietary static analyzer tool)
It is running on a Debian amd64 with the options:
--with-gnu-as --with-gnu-ld --disable-bootstrap
--enable-languages=jit,c,c++,fortran,lto,objc --enable-host-shared
On 27/02/2014 07:50, Mingjie Xing wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm wondering if it's a good idea to turn on some warnings by default
> (or even promote them to error), such as -Wreturn-type on C. This
> would help programmers to avoid some mistakes.
>
I am writing a patch for this specific change but it is
On 16/01/2014 03:45, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 16 January 2014 11:11, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 17/11/2013 17:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
>>> On 17 November 2013 15:40, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>>>> For "control reaches end of non-void
Hello,
On 17/11/2013 17:47, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 17 November 2013 15:40, Sylvestre Ledru wrote:
>> For "control reaches end of non-void function", I haven't activated by
>> default and I called the option -Wfalloff-nonvoid-function
>> Of course, that is
On 14/11/2013 12:48, Jonathan Wakely wrote:
> On 14 November 2013 11:31, Dodji Seketeli wrote:
>> For C, I am not sure about, but I'd find it useful to have that warning
>> enabled there too, so I guess I'd like to hear why the warning wasn't
>> enabled there by default there as well.
> A return st
On 17/11/2013 06:03, Alec Teal wrote:
> Who isn't compiling with -Wall and -Wextra?
>
Plenty of users ...
> I do hope Clang ('though I don't use it) doesn't make it an error
> because not all functions have to return in C iirc.
It does.
It makes 120 packages fail to build from source in Debian (on
Hello,
I would like to propose the activation by default of -Wreturn-type.
The main objective would to provide a warning for such code:
int foo() {
return;
}
For now, it is only enabled when we have -Wall:
$ gcc -c foo.c
$ gcc -Wall -c foo.c
foo.c: In function ‘foo’:
foo.c:2:2: warning:
10 matches
Mail list logo
