On 31-Jul-12 01:37, bearophile wrote:
Jonathan M Davis:
This is the sort of thing that's
better left to a lint-like tool IMHO.
Putting it in a lint means people have to know what a lint is, desire to
search it, install, and add its running to their compilation ways.
Just run it once on each release candidate. People constantly seek tools
to improve quality of their release code and catch possible bugs that
should be enough of motivation to install lint.
It
also means the lint needs to contain part of a D compiler.
Yeah when was the last time we had this compile as library "discussion"?
Most people I
know don't use lints for their C/C++ code.
Most people I know ignore warnings. "Most people I know" is hardly good
enough argument. e.g. "most people I know hate tons of compiler switches"
On the other the C#
programmers see such errors on default, with no lint. So this idea is
good if the lint is built in the compiler, as the analysis option of
Clang, do you know about it?
I know but DMD won't have it in near future. Other compilers may do what
they want to do.
--
Dmitry Olshansky
