Date: Sun, 30 Dec 2001 01:21:29 +1100 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> Cc: "David E. O'Brien" <obrien@FreeBSD.org>, <cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org>, <cvs-all@FreeBSD.org> Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/share/mk bsd.sys.mk Message-ID: <20011230011102.L5086-100000@gamplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20011229125025.A44606@walton.maths.tcd.ie>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 29 Dec 2001, David Malone wrote: > On Fri, Dec 14, 2001 at 10:02:15PM -0800, David E. O'Brien wrote: > > obrien 2001/12/14 22:02:15 PST > > > > Modified files: > > share/mk bsd.sys.mk > > Log: > > Add some granularity to the WARNS levels. > > 1: add -Werror > > 2: -Wall [only], as this is the most used warnings setting by developers > > 3: our old `1' > > 4: our old `2' > > WARNS=4 doesn't seem to be the same as WARNS=2 used to be, because > -Wno-uninitialized isn't getting added at the end of the warnings > flags and so -Wuninitialized is still producing false positives. > Could someone review the patch below? Doesn't it work where it already is, since it is to cancel the -Wuninitialized provied by -Wall? > Also, if we fiddle further with the meaning of WARNS levels, it may > make sense to number them as if we were basic programmers? Do mean to number them with gaps of 10 as in some dialects of BASIC? Nah, line limbers are braindamaged and level numbers are no better, with or without gaps. Level numbers are slightly more braindamaged because they are distributed and there is no RENUM command to fix them. There should be logical partially ordered sets of warnings that don't move when you add new ones. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011230011102.L5086-100000>