🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1993Feb12.170117.418@daimi.aau.dk> gnort@daimi.aau.dk (Lars Balker Rasmussen) writes:

> How does one avoid this warning without abandoning all the good parts of the
> -Wall option?

Check info node "(gcc.info)Warning Options".  You'll have to use all
the -Wxxx options above -Wall, except -W and -Wparentheses.


> These two, especially the former, are considered annoying by us

Right!

I toss out -Wimplicit too, because lots of int functions in the
standard library are undeclared.

Even gcc's authors don't agree with themselves about these warnings.
Never mind -Wall, just try to build gcc with CFLAGS=-W.  I'd expect -W
to express their opinion about warnings a program at LEAST should avoid.
It spews out other warnings too, mostly "possibly uninitialized"
variables (though only very few of these actually can be uninitialized).



I'd like to collect the warnings into -W0...-W9 options: -W0 = -w,
maybe -W6 = -Wall, -W9 = -Wall -Wcast-qual -Wshadow -ansi -pedantic.

It would also be nice to give the most usual warnings a single-letter
name, so we could say something like -W+aq-pi for -Wall -Wcast-qual
-Wno-parentheses -Wno-implicit (that's the -W's I prefer).

We'd just have to agree on which warnings are important, and how to
rank them...  How about an "advisory vote"?


Hallvard