Mike Frysinger <firstname.lastname@example.org> said:
> On Wednesday, August 25, 2010 11:55:07 Diego Elio Pettenò wrote:
> > What this bug is about is rather the kind of errors that I've
> > commented on in ,  and  which is that they _may_ be related
> > to macros or functions that are not declared/defined by the current
> > set of library dependencies, and would then lead to unresolved
> > undefined symbols, and thus, to runtime failure.
> - the return value is larger than an "int", and thus possibly
> truncated - the func requires 3 args, but user passes some other
> number, and compiler cannot flag it
> - the user passes args in the incorrect order and the compiler cant
> check it -mike
this is all very helpful info about the specific problem. we should
probably collect this kind of information in a (wiki) page somewhere and
point maintainers to it directly in the warning.
this would also help maintainers, when pushing patches upstream.
overall, i believe, that making the maintainers job easy, by providing him
ample guidance and knowledge on how to fix specific issues will make it
much more likely for him to fix the issue. this works for me anyway.