I guess I'll vote against adding this to opt: but it's not a strong vote. My main worry is that we'll spew tons of warnings from includes further upstream...
Derek Sent from my iPhone > On Dec 8, 2013, at 4:13 PM, "Kirk, Benjamin (JSC-EG311)" > <benjamin.k...@nasa.gov> wrote: > > > >> On Dec 8, 2013, at 4:38 PM, "Roy Stogner" <royst...@ices.utexas.edu> wrote: >> >> We don't currently add compiler warning flags to compilation in opt >> mode. Is there a reason why not? I'd have expected the extra >> compilation time spent generating warning flags to be dwarfed by the >> optimization work itself. > > No, there is no good reason why not. It does make it easier for end users to > get by with lots of warnings in opt mode as is though, so it's a pretty > verbose change for the user. > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK > Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. > Download it for free now! > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Libmesh-devel mailing list > Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base. Download it for free now! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Libmesh-devel mailing list Libmesh-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libmesh-devel
