Paul Eggert wrote:
> + Adjust to these changes, and fix some warnings elicited by
> + -Wall -Wextra that I ran into while testing.
Is that use of -Wextra an experiment, or do you want to use it always?
I'm asking because some the warnings that it enables are undesired, IMO,
while others are certainly useful:
-Wclobbered useless, due to GCC bugs
-Wcast-function-type
-Wempty-body I use empty bodies sometimes
-Wenum-conversion
-Wignored-qualifiers
-Wimplicit-fallthrough=3
-Wmissing-field-initializers you omit field initializers sometimes
-Wmissing-parameter-type
-Wold-style-declaration
-Woverride-init
-Wsign-compare very noisy, right?
-Wstring-compare
-Wtype-limits prevents writing code that works for both
signed and unsigned 'char'
-Wuninitialized
-Wshift-negative-value forces the use of unsigned, but you prefer
signed integers; also, right-shifting of
negative values is more dangerous than
left-
shifting
-Wunused-parameter quite noisy, as can be seen from your patch
-Wunused-but-set-parameter
I've used "-Wall" most of the time, so far. I'm open to changing my habits to
include other, useful options. But -Wempty-body and -Wsign-compare are certainly
not part of them.
The process I would use for determining what is useful and what is not is to
--create-testdir a testdir of all of gnulib, compile it with GCC 13 with the
warnings enabled, then filter the compilation log and see whether the warnings
help improving the code, separately for each warning option.
Bruno
