On Sep 28, 2011, at 11:19 PM, Matt Beaumont-Gay wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 22:52, John McCall <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> On Sep 28, 2011, at 10:25 PM, Matt Beaumont-Gay wrote:
>>> The noisy warning in question is floating-point-literal-to-int, which
>>> fires on a lot of code like "int kNumMicrosPerSecond = 1e6;". How
>>> would you feel about moving that warning under a more specific flag?
>>> And, to get slightly off-topic, how would you feel about adding code
>>> to that warning to silence it in "safe" cases for literals written in
>>> exponential form?
>> 
>> I think we should definitely not be warning for conversions that
>> preserve values exactly.
> 
> I'd still like to warn on "int i = 1.0", since we can offer a fixit
> hint that is always a strict (if minor) improvement.

Sure, that seems reasonable;  we can gate it on the existence of a
floating point.

John.
_______________________________________________
cfe-commits mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/cfe-commits

Reply via email to