Hi Pavel,
Pavel Janík <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>>> WaE = Warning as Error.
>
> or Warnings Are Errors.
>
> Gcc option -Werror: Make all warnings into errors.
>
> With this option turned on, all warnings are made into errors. Our long
> term goal is to make gcc silent.
Ah, yes, I remember now. We spent some time on this years ago, but never
coud make the whole code WaE-safe. Despite that, it's good to work on it;
sometimes this gives good hints at weird code.
> These issues are not errors per se, but e.g.:
>
> @@ -1330,6 +1331,7 @@
>
> void ImpSdrGDIMetaFileImport::DoAction(MetaWallpaperAction& rAct)
Please just comment /*rAct*/
> {
> + (void) rAct;
> OSL_ENSURE(false, "Tried to construct SdrObject from
> MetaWallpaperAction: not supported (!)");
> }
>
> This means that rAct is unused in the method. gcc warns about it.
>
> This change:
>
> @@ -1384,6 +1388,7 @@
> case GRADIENT_ELLIPTICAL: aXGradientStyle =
> XGRAD_ELLIPTICAL; break;
> case GRADIENT_SQUARE: aXGradientStyle = XGRAD_SQUARE; break;
> case GRADIENT_RECT: aXGradientStyle = XGRAD_RECT; break;
> + default: break;
Hmm. I do not have the code at hand right now, cannot tell until monday.
> }
>
> const XFillGradientItem aXFillGradientItem(
>
> means that some enum value is forgotten in the switch.
>
> This change:
>
> - for(sal_uInt32 y(0); y < pOld->Height(); y++)
> + for(sal_Int32 y(0); y < pOld->Height(); y++)
Please change to sal_uInt32
> means that we were comparing signed and unsigned value.
>
> I do not know if these changes are OK, thus I send the patch as I used to
> make the module WaE free.
I have not seen a patch. If you have one, please send again (maybe
directly) and I'll happily take a look on monday. I'm currently not
compiling on gcc, so I will not be able to guarantee, though.
> Hope this helps.
>
> P.S. Of course warnings differ between compilers and sometims the changes
> look weird etc.
Yes, I remember now. Do you have a good solution for swich..case where not
all missing entries would have to be listed?
--
ALG
