Of course, you could also call GCC like this '-Wall
-Wno-unused-parameter'. Then you will only get warnings about unused
functions and local variables.
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 9:49 AM, Charles R Harris
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:28 AM, David Cournapeau <[EMAIL PROTECT
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 4:28 AM, David Cournapeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Lisandro Dalcin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > David, I second your approach. Furthermore, look how SWIG handles
> > this, it is very similar to your proposal. The difference is that SWIG
On Tue, Aug 5, 2008 at 1:29 AM, Lisandro Dalcin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> David, I second your approach. Furthermore, look how SWIG handles
> this, it is very similar to your proposal. The difference is that SWIG
> uses SWIGUNUSED for some autogenerated functions. Furthermore, it
> seems the SWI
David, I second your approach. Furthermore, look how SWIG handles
this, it is very similar to your proposal. The difference is that SWIG
uses SWIGUNUSED for some autogenerated functions. Furthermore, it
seems the SWIG developers protected the generated code taking into
account GCC versions ;-) and
David Cournapeau wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 01:50 +0200, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
>> Just to be clear: I meant that I agree with you that we should see
>> NumPy related warnings that aren't smothered in bogus messages. Is
>> there no way to do this without compiler-specific hacks?
>
> Yes,
On Sun, 2008-08-03 at 19:32 -0500, Charles R Harris wrote:
>
>
>
> There is self and args, filter them out. If the arguments have other
> names, rename them.
That's much more error prone. You would need a list of such arguments,
and more importantly, it means you cannot enable warnin
On Mon, 2008-08-04 at 01:50 +0200, Stéfan van der Walt wrote:
>
> Just to be clear: I meant that I agree with you that we should see
> NumPy related warnings that aren't smothered in bogus messages. Is
> there no way to do this without compiler-specific hacks?
Yes, there is, but it is more error
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 6:39 PM, David Cournapeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 8:31 AM, Charles R Harris
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > But how many methods do arrays and types have? As many as 1500?
>
> With autogenerated code, it is not difficult to imagine so many wa
2008/8/4 David Cournapeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Stéfan van der Walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>
>> I agree -- seeing the NumPy-related build warnings would be very useful.
>
> I did not anticipate people would disagree on the idea of removing
> warnings, so I gu
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 8:31 AM, Charles R Harris
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> But how many methods do arrays and types have? As many as 1500?
With autogenerated code, it is not difficult to imagine so many warnings.
>I think it
> is a bad idea to work around these sort of things. If self is nee
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 6:02 PM, David Cournapeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Charles R Harris
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> > I say leave these warnings alone. If nothing else, they point to possible
> > cleanups in some future refactoring.
>
> Not really,
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 8:14 AM, Stéfan van der Walt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I agree -- seeing the NumPy-related build warnings would be very useful.
I did not anticipate people would disagree on the idea of removing
warnings, so I guess thare are two questions:
- why / why not removing bo
Hi David
2008/8/4 David Cournapeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Also, having hundred of bogus warnings mean you never see the
> interesting ones (building numpy core alone with -W generates > 1500
> such bogus warnings...)
I agree -- seeing the NumPy-related build warnings would be very useful.
Do you
On Mon, Aug 4, 2008 at 12:35 AM, Charles R Harris
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I say leave these warnings alone. If nothing else, they point to possible
> cleanups in some future refactoring.
Not really, because they are inherent to the way the Python C API
works (the first argument of any pyth
On Sun, Aug 3, 2008 at 5:25 AM, David Cournapeau <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>I have recently tried various warning flags with numpy, and already
> discover
> several potential errors in the C code. Now, because of the huge amount of
> warning
> we get with e.g. -W -Wall, it would be n
Hi,
I have recently tried various warning flags with numpy, and already discover
several potential errors in the C code. Now, because of the huge amount of
warning
we get with e.g. -W -Wall, it would be nice to clean the code for this
kind of warning 'level' because we have a huge amount of g
16 matches
Mail list logo
