Hi,
It seems that enabling -Werror by default is within reach for lldb now.
There currently are three warnings that remain with gcc 5.1 on Linux, and
the build is clean of warnings with clang.
There are two instances of type range limitations on comparisons in
asserts, and one instance of string
er term I would be happy
> to see -Werror turned on for llvm and clang first and then we can follow up
> with lldb but making this change will require a lot of discussion and might
> get some push back.
>
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 6:02 AM Saleem Abdulrasool via lldb-dev <
> l
gt;> should write warning free code for lldb (I think it already kind of exists)
>>> and we as a community try to ensure it during code review and with fixing
>>> the possible things what slip through. In the longer term I would be happy
>>> to see -Werror turned on
thing.
> On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:31 AM Saleem Abdulrasool via lldb-dev <
> lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, February 16, 2016, Tamas Berghammer
>> wrote:
>>
>>> If you want to enable it only on the bots then I think we can decide it
>
ome warnings (which I don't want to do either)
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 10:31 AM Saleem Abdulrasool via lldb-dev
> > mailto:lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org>> wrote:
> >
> > On Tuesday, February 16, 2016, Tamas Berghammer
> > mailto:tbergham...@google.com&
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Tim Northover via llvm-dev <
llvm-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 31 May 2016 at 12:31, Renato Golin via cfe-dev
> wrote:
> > What do people think? Any issue not covered that we should?
>
> I'm in favour of the move. Git-svn just about works most of the time,
> b
On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 5:01 PM, Mehdi Amini via lldb-dev <
lldb-dev@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
>
> > On Jun 13, 2016, at 4:54 PM, Hans Wennborg wrote:
> >
> > Breaking this out into a separate thread since it's kind of a separate
> > issue, and to make sure people see it.
>
> Thanks!
>
> >
> > If yo
On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 5:43 PM, Dmitri Gribenko via cfe-dev <
cfe-...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 24, 2016 at 4:41 PM, Hans Wennborg via llvm-dev
> wrote:
> > Richard suggested that since we do time-based rather than
> > feature-based releases, the distinction between a release with or
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 11:38 AM, Ed Maste via lldb-commits <
lldb-comm...@lists.llvm.org> wrote:
> On 24 October 2016 at 06:26, Pavel Labath wrote:
> >
> > It's not my place to tell you how to work, but I'd recommend a
> > different approach to this. If you base your work on the current
> > Free
