> Is elektra currently portable to any other compiler than gcc? Besides, > people who use a different compiler 1) are in the minority, and 2) know > how to turn off -Wall.
I'd be curious to know how you do that... It is in AM_CFLAGS or even in *_la_*CFLAGS. > Besides, having -Wall there serves a red flag for anyone compiling on a > compiler which doesn't support it -- it means their compiler isn't > explicitly supported and that they should beware. Using the autotools allow the easy support of any compiler. Supporting new target is less obvious, but I don't see why we should complicate the task of those who want to use another compiler. > Why? Warnings are things that should always be fixed or at the very > least done explicitly(*) to avoid confusion about the programmer's intent. I'm not the one to be convinced, look at my other mails. That's a separate issue, though. > > For example a > > user may ant to set -Werror but not -Wall > > If they're going to set -Werror, they'll have to mess with CFLAGS anyway... I really can't see why. They'll have to set the CFLAGS, but for the whole build, not per Makefile.am. They shouldn't have to modify the Makefile.am. Currently, not using -Wall means editing a lot of Makefile.am. > Well, I think removing -Wall is a Bad Idea. -Wall is a sensible default > and I would want a much stronger argument than you've given for removing > it. It doesn't prevent code from compiling, and we actually don't WANT > code to compile when -Wall is not supported -- we want the developer Why "we actually don't WANT code to compile when -Wall is not supported"? There were quite a lot of warnings with gcc 4.1.1. > who's trying to compile on an unsupported compiler to actually stop and > try to understand the issues instead of just assuming that things will > work -- warnings be damned. After all, a different compiler may even Somebody trying to use a compiler that don't have a -Wall is stuck. > Why make the majority of devs add stuff to their environment just to They can also do it the regular way, like ./configure CFLAGS="-g -O2 -Wall" > avoid the minority having to remove those flags? They're already going > to be messing with $CC, anyway. Not necessarily. autoconf knows about a lot of compilers. In case -Wall is to be the default, at least it should be hardcoded in configure.ac, not scattered around in Makefile.am files. Would that be acceptable? -- Pat ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys -- and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV _______________________________________________ Registry-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/registry-list
