david at kdbarto.org
Fri Jan 29 16:42:04 CST 2021
> On Jan 29, 2021, at 2:08 PM, Fred Cisin via cctalk <cctalk at classiccmp.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, wrcooke at wrcooke.net wrote:
>> Modern Visual Studio and GCC both flag the "=" in a condition, I believe. But if you're shipping code with 260+ warnings, who would see one more.
> In some cases, it is possible to put in preprocessor directives to alert the compiler that you are aware of it, and to NOT generate the WARNING.
> Or, in many cases to modify the code, such as EXPLICIT typedefs to not generate warnings.
> int X = PI; /* should give a warning */
> int x = (int)PI; /* should be OK, without a loss of efficiency */
> It's scary that code gets shipped as soon as it "seems to be working", without confirming that ALL of the 260+ WARNINGS are deliberately over-ridden.
Whenever I start a new job the first thing I do today is enable -Werror; all warnings are errors. And I’ll fix every one. Even when everyone claims that “These are not a problem”. Before that existed, I’d do the same with lint, and FlexeLint when I could get it.
And in every case, every single time I did this, for some reason the various “mysterious crash” problems would go away. Every time. But it couldn’t be those warnings, they weren’t the problem.
More information about the cctech