On 11 Jun 2006 10:14:02 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Please, do consider the above suggestions.
I will indeed and I am already thinking about them. Thanks for sharing
your thoughts with me. I will try to make my following emails more
clear on its definitions.
Cheers,
Ma
On 11 Jun 2006 10:31:07 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| My project is about "risky" coercions in general: assignments,
| operators, prototypes. You can see some (and comment and propose)
| testcases in http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| My project is about "risky" coercions in general: assignments,
| operators, prototypes. You can see some (and comment and propose)
| testcases in http://gcc.gnu.org/wiki/Wcoercion .
void h2(void)
{
int i;
for(i=0; i < siz
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 10 Jun 2006 20:07:02 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| > I'll like to see a more precise definition of your understanding of
| > "coercion" versus "conversion". Last time we dicussed this I was not
| > quite clear about wha
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On 10/06/06, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| >
| > Here is my vote, have four options:
| > -Wconversion the same as now.
|
| This is bad idea. Currently many people are relying in undocumented
| behaviour or the false perception that
On 10/06/06, Andrew Pinski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Here is my vote, have four options:
-Wconversion the same as now.
This is bad idea. Currently many people are relying in undocumented
behaviour or the false perception that Wconversion detects risky
conversions. If we keep Wconversion, they
On 10 Jun 2006 20:07:02 -0500, Gabriel Dos Reis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'll like to see a more precise definition of your understanding of
"coercion" versus "conversion". Last time we dicussed this I was not
quite clear about what you consider is "bad" what is not.
I was under the impression
"Manuel López-Ibáñez" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]
| (b) keep the warnings of conversions that may change a value in
| Wconversion and move its original purpose (the warnings about
| prototypes causing ... in the absence of a prototype) to a new option
| (suggestions are welcome).
I prefer
On Jun 10, 2006, at 1:30 PM, Manuel López-Ibáñez wrote:
On 09/06/06, Eric Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think I like b) the most. That way people who are accustomed to
using -Wconversion for value conversions can continue doing so and we
can move to something like -Wprototype-conve
On 09/06/06, Eric Christopher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I think I like b) the most. That way people who are accustomed to
using -Wconversion for value conversions can continue doing so and we
can move to something like -Wprototype-conversion or something for
the other (and stick the second in -
I have to choose between:
(a) keep Wconversion only for warnings about prototypes causing a type
conversion different from what would happen to the same argument in
the absence of a prototype, which was its original purpose, and move
everything else to a new option (Wcoercion).
(b) keep the wa
11 matches
Mail list logo
