On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 21:18 +0200, Philip Withnall wrote: > On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 13:24 -0400, Colin Walters wrote: > > On Fri, 2012-07-27 at 17:28 +0200, Frederic Peters wrote: > > > Colin Walters wrote: > > > > > > > For compiler warning defaults, I think something similar what Dan > > > > Winship has in libsoup is what we should replicate across more GNOME > > > > modules: > > > > > > > > http://git.gnome.org/browse/libsoup/tree/configure.ac?id=f5902fce98ae0314f0d9ca6e544895548c94a456#n339 > > > > > > > > It's better than the GNOME_COMPILE_WARNINGS macro in gnome-common right > > > > now, and *definitely* better than various modules having -Wall -Werror. > > > > > > Is there some problem in fixing that macro? It would instantly fix > > > dozens of modules (over 50 according to a quick grep). > > > > Sure, I'm fine with that myself. Let's see if anyone has objections, if > > not I'll try a test build and see if anything needs fixing. > > > > Not everything uses GNOME_COMPILE_WARNINGS, but that's not a big deal - > > my main goal here is to in order: > > Furthermore, is there any reason why modules shouldn't be using > GNOME_COMPILE_WARNINGS? It would be great if we could standardise on > using it so that we can guarantee that the classes of bugs it detects > are highlighted (and perhaps eventually eliminated) in GNOME code. > > Philip
If module is using Vala probably warnings are useless for code generated by the compiler. Maciej _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
