List Archive: gentoo-dev
Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date.
provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.c.f. bug 424647
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 02:56:33PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
> On 06/27/2010 01:47 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> > * Nikos Chantziaras<realnc@...> schrieb:
> >> Did it actually occur to anyone that warnings are not errors? You can
> >> have them for correct code. A warning means you might want to look at
> >> the code to check whether there's some real error there. It doesn't
> >> mean the code is broken.
> > In my personal experience, most times a warning comes it, the
> > code *is* broken (but *might* work in most situations).
> That's the key to it: most times. Granted, without -Wall (or any other
> options that tweaks the default warning level) we can be very sure that
> the warning is the result of a mistake by the developer. But with
> -Wall, many warnings are totally not interesting ("unused parameter")
> and some even try to outsmart the programmer even though he/she knows
> better ("taking address of variable declared register"). In that last
> example, fixing it would even be wrong when you consider the optimizer
> and the fuzzy meaning of "register" which the compiler is totally free
> to ignore.
The compiler is not totally free to ignore the register keyword. Both
the C and the C++ standards require that the compiler complain when
taking the address of a register variable. Other compilers will issue a
hard error for it. Fixing the code to not declare the variable as
register would be the correct thing to do.
Make sure you *understand* warnings, and then you can decide whether to
fix the code, if there is anything to fix, or to ignore.