On Thu, Nov 14, 2002 at 11:04:59AM -0500, Paul Smith wrote: > %% Dominik Vogt <fvwm-workers@fvwm.org> writes: > > dv> Heck! Why isn't that mentioned in the gcc info page?! > > You mean like this: > > These warnings are possible only in optimizing compilation, > because they require data flow information that is computed only > when optimizing. If you don't specify `-O', you simply won't get > these warnings. > > ? :)
Sorry, I somehow missed that paragraph. I just can't operate info :-/ At least it should throw a warning that it does not generate these warnings ;-) > dv> So I can't have debuggable code and many important warnings at the > dv> same time? > > Yep. I agree it's a drag--I've often felt that the -O0 flag or > something should have a side-effect of doing the optimization warning > checks, but then not actually optimizing the resulting code. > > Actually I'm not sure about "many important warnings"; I think the only > two warnings which are enabled only for optimization are uninitialized > variables > (which is certainly important, I grant you) Especially when you are used to rely on it. > and "nonvolatile > automatic variables being changed by longjmp"... which is rarely > useful. > > I misspoke last time about the unused variables: those are warned even > without -O. It's the uninitialized variables that aren't warned unless > you enable -O. Bye Dominik ^_^ ^_^ -- Visit the official FVWM web page at <URL:http://www.fvwm.org/>. To unsubscribe from the list, send "unsubscribe fvwm-workers" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To report problems, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
