[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 28 May 2015 03:29:22 -0400
From: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
To: musl@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: More on warning cleanup
On Thu, May 28, 2015 at 08:55:24AM +0200, Alex Dowad wrote:
> >Are these any other warnings we should enable?
> Are you interested in warnings provided by clang, but not by gcc?
Possibly.
> 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).
Only interested in warnings that catch non-portable constructs,
near-certain bugs (e.g. UB if the code is reached), typos (unused
warnings help here), etc.
Not interested in coding style policing, and definitely not interested
in warnings that are intended for JS or Python programmers trying to
write their first C program. :-)
Rich
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.
