Hi Ronald,

Am 17.10.2016 um 21:37 schrieb Ronald S. Bultje:
> Hi Michael,
> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Michael Behrisch <o...@behrisch.de>
> wrote:
>> Am 17.10.2016 um 15:29 schrieb Michael Niedermayer:
>>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 01:34:55PM +0200, wm4 wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:09:36 +0200 Michael Niedermayer
>>>> <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote:
>>> this is about a cosmetic change having no real technical effect
>> So here are my cosmetics for libavutil. It simply helps with
>> keeping track of real warnings in downstream projects.
> Why are you using -Wpedantic?

My main reason is that we are compiling with different compilers for
different platforms and -Wpedantic at least promises to keep the code
closer to the standard and thus better transferable. I never tested
whether this is actually true, but I like the fact that the project
currently compiles with gcc, clang and msvc and welcome every tool and
option that helps me to keep it this way. See also here:

> Most people use warnings as a way for the compiler to inform them of 
> potential bugs in their code; has -Wpedantic ever helped you find
> bugs?

I cannot think of any but to be honest I cannot even tell exactly which
warnings are enabled by which of the -Wall, -Wextra and -Wpedantic flags
and it is surprisingly hard to find out.

Best regards,

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

ffmpeg-devel mailing list

Reply via email to