Em qua 07 maio 2014, às 11:37:31, Mikołaj Siedlarek escreveu:
> Therefore Qt have to settle on some level of warnings, probably closer to
> -Wall with some warnings disabled, and user is also forced to settle on the
> same level or lower. I compile my project on -Weverything with some
> warnings di
Em qua 07 maio 2014, às 10:59:21, Kurt Pattyn escreveu:
> It is a very good idea to have the Qt files treated as system files. I’ve
> gone to great lengths to filter out the warnings from Qt in our CMake
> files. It would be nice if this was included out-of-the-box.
qmake also uses -isystem nowada
Em qua 07 maio 2014, às 10:15:57, Robert Knight escreveu:
> I enabled suppression of warnings in Qt headers for a project a while
> back and ended up suppressing
> a real and serious warning that occurred when a generic class in Qt
> was instantiated with a particular
> type in my code. IIRC I was
On 07 May 2014, at 11:15, Robert Knight wrote:
>> It is a very good idea to have the Qt files treated as system files.
>> I’ve gone to great lengths to filter out the warnings from Qt in our CMake
>> files
>
> I would caution against that. Could we just fix the warnings in Qt
> headers instea
On Tuesday, May 06, 2014 11:40:34 Mikołaj Siedlarek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’m on a quest to enable hack-free all-warnings-enabled building of my
> project using, among others, Qt and CMake. This requires that compiler
> treat Qt headers included in my code as “system headers” and not warn me
> about co
> I compile my project on -Weverything with some warnings disabled
> (bad case of OCD I guess)
I try to build with as many warnings enabled as possible and -Werror on as well,
so I'm very much a fan of asking the compiler to be strict.
The issue I mentioned above though cost me a lot of debugging
On 07 May 2014, at 11:15, Robert Knight wrote:
>> It is a very good idea to have the Qt files treated as system files.
>> I’ve gone to great lengths to filter out the warnings from Qt in our CMake
>> files
>
> I would caution against that. Could we just fix the warnings in Qt
> headers instead?
> It is a very good idea to have the Qt files treated as system files.
> I’ve gone to great lengths to filter out the warnings from Qt in our CMake
> files
I would caution against that. Could we just fix the warnings in Qt
headers instead?
I enabled suppression of warnings in Qt headers for a pr
On 07 May 2014, at 10:59, Kurt Pattyn wrote:
> On 06 May 2014, at 11:40, Mikołaj Siedlarek wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I’m on a quest to enable hack-free all-warnings-enabled building of my
>> project using, among others,
>> Qt and CMake. This requires that compiler treat Qt headers included in my
On 06 May 2014, at 11:40, Mikołaj Siedlarek wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I’m on a quest to enable hack-free all-warnings-enabled building of my
> project using, among others,
> Qt and CMake. This requires that compiler treat Qt headers included in my
> code as “system headers”
> and not warn me about co
Hi,
I’m on a quest to enable hack-free all-warnings-enabled building of my project
using, among others,
Qt and CMake. This requires that compiler treat Qt headers included in my code
as “system headers”
and not warn me about constructs used in them.
I already contributed -iframework (Apple fram
11 matches
Mail list logo
