Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 08:55:24 +0200 From: Alex Dowad <alexinbeijing@...il.com> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: More on warning cleanup On 28/05/15 07:08, Rich Felker wrote: > Since compilers differ in what warnings they include in -Wall, I'd > like to remove -Wall (followed by a bunch of -Wno-*) from musl's > --enable-warnings and instead individually turn on the warnings we > want. A few weeks ago I worked those out on #musl (based on the GCC > manual's documentation of -Wall and other options) and here's what I > came up with: > > -Waddress > -Warray-bounds > -Wchar-subscripts > -Wreturn-type > -Wsequence-point > -Wstrict-aliasing > -Wstrict-overflow > -Wunused-function > -Wunused-variable > -Wunused-label > > This list does not include the ones we already have as errors because > they only trigger on invalid C: > > -Werror=implicit-function-declaration > -Werror=implicit-int > -Werror=pointer-sign > -Werror=pointer-arith > > Are these any other warnings we should enable? Are you interested in warnings provided by clang, but not by gcc? I've noticed that there are a few things in musl which clang warns about, but gcc doesn't; such as expressions where operator precedence might be confusing to some, and indexing into strings using + (it wants you to use  instead).
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.