On Mon, Jan 14, 2013 at 10:31:27PM +0200, Martin Storsjö wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jan 2013, Diego Biurrun wrote: > >--- a/configure > >+++ b/configure > >@@ -3693,6 +3693,9 @@ elif enabled clang; then > > check_cflags -Werror=implicit-function-declaration > > check_cflags -Werror=missing-prototypes > >+ check_cflags -Werror=declaration-after-statement > >+ check_cflags -Werror=return-type > >+ check_cflags -Werror=vla > > Sure all of these are useful? See > http://patches.libav.org/patch/30532/ for previous discussion on the > topic - back then I tested that neither of > -Werror=(declaratioin-after-statement|vla) actually had any effect, > even if clang accepted them without any warnings/errors. > > Specifying them even though they aren't implemented right now might > be useful if they ever become implemented later, but I'm not sure if > that's smart or just misleading.
The stupid thing is that -Werror=return-type has no effect with gcc, but works as advertised with clang. I'm inclined to think that adding all options for both compilers would give us maximum coverage, at least on FATE. Diego _______________________________________________ libav-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.libav.org/mailman/listinfo/libav-devel
