* Nikos Chantziaras rea...@arcor.de schrieb:
Did it actually occur to anyone that warnings are not errors? You can
have them for correct code. A warning means you might want to look at
the code to check whether there's some real error there. It doesn't
mean the code is broken.
In my
On 06/27/2010 01:47 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
* Nikos Chantziarasrea...@arcor.de schrieb:
Did it actually occur to anyone that warnings are not errors? You can
have them for correct code. A warning means you might want to look at
the code to check whether there's some real error there. It
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 02:56:33PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 06/27/2010 01:47 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
* Nikos Chantziarasrea...@arcor.de schrieb:
Did it actually occur to anyone that warnings are not errors? You can
have them for correct code. A warning means you might want
* Harald van D??k true...@gentoo.org schrieb:
The compiler is not totally free to ignore the register keyword. Both
the C and the C++ standards require that the compiler complain when
taking the address of a register variable. Other compilers will issue a
hard error for it. Fixing the code to
On Sun, 27 Jun 2010 14:25:39 +0200
Enrico Weigelt weig...@metux.de wrote:
hmm, is there a (portable) way to prevent a specific warning
in an specific place ? (some kind of #pragma ?)
No.
--
Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
On 06/27/2010 03:23 PM, Harald van Dijk wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 02:56:33PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 06/27/2010 01:47 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
* Nikos Chantziarasrea...@arcor.de schrieb:
Did it actually occur to anyone that warnings are not errors?
You can have them for
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 05:46:28PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 06/27/2010 03:23 PM, Harald van Dijk wrote:
The compiler is not totally free to ignore the register keyword.
Both the C and the C++ standards require that the compiler complain
when taking the address of a register
On 06/27/2010 08:14 PM, Harald van Dijk wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 05:46:28PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 06/27/2010 03:23 PM, Harald van Dijk wrote:
The compiler is not totally free to ignore the register keyword.
Both the C and the C++ standards require that the compiler complain
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 08:48:25PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
...
It is allowed. Section 7.1.1, Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the C++ standard:
...
Not in C.
ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (aka C99), section 6.7.1, note 101:
The implementation may treat any register declaration simply as an auto
On 06/27/2010 09:10 PM, dev-ran...@mail.ru wrote:
On Sun, Jun 27, 2010 at 08:48:25PM +0300, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
...
It is allowed. Section 7.1.1, Paragraphs 2 and 3 of the C++ standard:
...
Not in C.
ISO/IEC 9899:1999 (aka C99), section 6.7.1, note 101:
The implementation may treat any
On 06/26/2010 10:39 PM, Enrico Weigelt wrote:
* Petteri Rätybetelge...@gentoo.org schrieb:
There should be useful stuff here:
http://video.fosdem.org/2010/devrooms/distributions/How_to_be_a_good_upstream.ogv
[...[
#2 One point i don't agree is the dont add -Werror rule. actually,
i'm
On 06/26/2010 11:12 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Sat, 26 Jun 2010 21:57:33 +0200
Enrico Weigeltweig...@metux.de wrote:
Uhm. No. Certain compilers will give you warnings for f(g(a), g(b))
if you -Wall.
Warn on what exactly ?
That f's arguments are evaluated in an unspecified order.
Which
12 matches
Mail list logo
