On Mon, Oct 29, 2007 at 01:26:45AM +0100, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > I think the question is whether a compiler can reasonably be expected > to deduce that the source is fine. If that deduction involves solving > the halting problem (or similar) hacking the source to avoid the warning > actually doesn't occur to be that bad. ;-)
Nope, you can't depend on the compiler to verify your code is correct. That's why you should try to write it in such a way that people can understand it. Hacking the code to make the compiler happy at the cost of making the code less clear is not a good idea. > > I think the real problem is that the code is just not clear enough. > > I've been meaning to add asserts. Where asserts are impractical: > > comments. > > Does this mean you are going to submit some patches to address this? If you tell me what options you build with and I can reproduce the warning then I'll be more than happy to try to fix it. I build widl with -W -Wall and get two warnings. One of which is in the bison-generated code; the other I sent a patch to silence and Alexandre rejected it.
