Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH mesa] meson: merge C and C++ compiler arguments check

2018-03-22 Thread Eric Engestrom
On Thursday, 2018-03-22 11:17:55 -0700, Dylan Baker wrote:
> Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-03-22 05:08:55)
> > On Monday, 2018-03-12 10:16:33 -0700, Dylan Baker wrote:
> > > Quoting Emil Velikov (2018-03-12 09:09:50)
> > > > On 12 March 2018 at 15:01, Eric Engestrom  
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom 
> > > > > ---
> > > > > Dylan, was there any reason to have -Werror=missing-prototypes and
> > > > > -Werror=implicit-function-declaration in C but not C++?
> > > > > Both sound to me like something we always want.
> > > > 
> > > > Seems to be copied from the autotools setup.
> > > > Reason being, both are not valid for C++.
> > > > Although since we probe for them, everything should be fine. The C++
> > > > test will bail out and the flags won't be set during the actual build.
> > > 
> > > Which is why I left them separate, since it avoids having to compile for
> > > arguments we know that C++ doesn't support.
> > 
> > Pushed now (cb2ddcefa5196fdfeff7), but to explain, my point was: we want
> > those warnings when possible, so we might as well test for them and use
> > them if/when support is added in the compilers.
> > 
> > The configure-time cost is very low, and the build-time cost is
> > non-existent :)
> > 
> > > It probably doesn't matter either way,
> > > 
> > > Reviewed-by: Dylan Baker 
> 
> I didn't notice before, but this breaks compiling basically all of our C++ 
> code
> with clang since it adds -Werror=missing-prototypes, and clang gets very angry
> at us.

Ah crap :(
Are you pushing a revert, or should I?

Question though, why is the code full of missing prototypes? Is that
a compiler mistake (false-positives), or is the code really missing
a bunch of includes?

> 
> Dylan
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev


Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH mesa] meson: merge C and C++ compiler arguments check

2018-03-22 Thread Dylan Baker
Quoting Eric Engestrom (2018-03-22 05:08:55)
> On Monday, 2018-03-12 10:16:33 -0700, Dylan Baker wrote:
> > Quoting Emil Velikov (2018-03-12 09:09:50)
> > > On 12 March 2018 at 15:01, Eric Engestrom  
> > > wrote:
> > > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom 
> > > > ---
> > > > Dylan, was there any reason to have -Werror=missing-prototypes and
> > > > -Werror=implicit-function-declaration in C but not C++?
> > > > Both sound to me like something we always want.
> > > 
> > > Seems to be copied from the autotools setup.
> > > Reason being, both are not valid for C++.
> > > Although since we probe for them, everything should be fine. The C++
> > > test will bail out and the flags won't be set during the actual build.
> > 
> > Which is why I left them separate, since it avoids having to compile for
> > arguments we know that C++ doesn't support.
> 
> Pushed now (cb2ddcefa5196fdfeff7), but to explain, my point was: we want
> those warnings when possible, so we might as well test for them and use
> them if/when support is added in the compilers.
> 
> The configure-time cost is very low, and the build-time cost is
> non-existent :)
> 
> > It probably doesn't matter either way,
> > 
> > Reviewed-by: Dylan Baker 

I didn't notice before, but this breaks compiling basically all of our C++ code
with clang since it adds -Werror=missing-prototypes, and clang gets very angry
at us.

Dylan


signature.asc
Description: signature
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev


Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH mesa] meson: merge C and C++ compiler arguments check

2018-03-22 Thread Eric Engestrom
On Monday, 2018-03-12 10:16:33 -0700, Dylan Baker wrote:
> Quoting Emil Velikov (2018-03-12 09:09:50)
> > On 12 March 2018 at 15:01, Eric Engestrom  wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom 
> > > ---
> > > Dylan, was there any reason to have -Werror=missing-prototypes and
> > > -Werror=implicit-function-declaration in C but not C++?
> > > Both sound to me like something we always want.
> > 
> > Seems to be copied from the autotools setup.
> > Reason being, both are not valid for C++.
> > Although since we probe for them, everything should be fine. The C++
> > test will bail out and the flags won't be set during the actual build.
> 
> Which is why I left them separate, since it avoids having to compile for
> arguments we know that C++ doesn't support.

Pushed now (cb2ddcefa5196fdfeff7), but to explain, my point was: we want
those warnings when possible, so we might as well test for them and use
them if/when support is added in the compilers.

The configure-time cost is very low, and the build-time cost is
non-existent :)

> It probably doesn't matter either way,
> 
> Reviewed-by: Dylan Baker 
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev


Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH mesa] meson: merge C and C++ compiler arguments check

2018-03-12 Thread Dylan Baker
Quoting Emil Velikov (2018-03-12 09:09:50)
> On 12 March 2018 at 15:01, Eric Engestrom  wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom 
> > ---
> > Dylan, was there any reason to have -Werror=missing-prototypes and
> > -Werror=implicit-function-declaration in C but not C++?
> > Both sound to me like something we always want.
> 
> Seems to be copied from the autotools setup.
> Reason being, both are not valid for C++.
> Although since we probe for them, everything should be fine. The C++
> test will bail out and the flags won't be set during the actual build.

Which is why I left them separate, since it avoids having to compile for
arguments we know that C++ doesn't support. It probably doesn't matter either
way,

Reviewed-by: Dylan Baker 


signature.asc
Description: signature
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev


Re: [Mesa-dev] [PATCH mesa] meson: merge C and C++ compiler arguments check

2018-03-12 Thread Emil Velikov
On 12 March 2018 at 15:01, Eric Engestrom  wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Eric Engestrom 
> ---
> Dylan, was there any reason to have -Werror=missing-prototypes and
> -Werror=implicit-function-declaration in C but not C++?
> Both sound to me like something we always want.

Seems to be copied from the autotools setup.
Reason being, both are not valid for C++.

Although since we probe for them, everything should be fine. The C++
test will bail out and the flags won't be set during the actual build.

Reviewed-by: Emil Velikov 

-Emil
___
mesa-dev mailing list
mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org
https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev