On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 09:59:20PM +0100, Thomas Adam wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 09:46:48PM +0100, Dominik Vogt wrote:
> I do take your point about auto
> variables having some value, and in 99% of the cases they're fine left
> alone until needed.  But when the compiler (GCC) tends to issue that
> warning, IME, it's always usually something to take note of, rather than
> ignore---whether you've block-scoped something (as in your example),
> explicitly, or not.

I'd even add that in 99% of the cases, initializing variables is
bad because it disables a more usefull warning.

> > At the moment, I'd turn -Wextra on only for the core, removing all
> > four classes of existing warnings, i.e.
> > 
> >   -Wextra -Wno-unused-parameter -Wno-sign-compare -Wno-type-limits
> >   -Wno-missing-field-initializers 
> > 
> > Then only three warnings in MvwmPager.c remain, and they point to
> > real bugs that I'll fix in the separate branch and in fvwm.
> 
> Sounds good.  Please go ahead and do this.  :)

Done.  I'll keep it all in the warnings branch for now.

Ciao

Dominik ^_^  ^_^

-- 

Dominik Vogt

Reply via email to