Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg%britannica.bec.de@localhost> writes:
> On Fri, Aug 19, 2011 at 10:57:53AM -0400, Jim Wise wrote:
>> And the project has a long history of making sure all (these days: most)
>> code in the base distribution builds with -Wall -Werror. This isn't
>> because every GCC warning is right, of course -- it's because when you
>> turn off warnings for a whole file, you risk hiding another warning
>> which _is_ a sign of an actual code problem.
>
> When have you last checked the number of -Wno-* instances in base?
> Sorry, but pessimizing code to work around clearly bogus GCC warnings is
> not helpful. It doesn't make code easier to read, it doesn't improve
> code quality. It's the same kind of behavior that results in
> isalpha((int)ch) code.
A very long time ago -- but two notes:
a.) looking at the rdiff in the original commit message, this wasn't
disabling a specific warning with -Wno-*, it was passing -Wno-error,
to allow the build to proceed regardless of warnings in this file
b.) When you go fishing, you ever catch _all_ the fish? If there are
other unfixed warnings in the tree, it's because no one's done the
work to fix them, not -- unless policy has changed since I've been
paying as much attention -- because the goal is no longer to have
the tree build with -Wall -Werror
At this late date, NetBSD isn't going to distinguish itself with
features, mass adoption, or desktop whiz-banginess. It _does_ still
stand out as the FOSS OS project that cares the most about code quality.
Let's not break that.
--
Jim Wise
jwise%draga.com@localhost
Attachment:
pgpdj6Cc3B015.pgp
Description: PGP signature