On Wed, Jun 01, 2011 at 05:05:27PM -0500, Jonathan Nieder wrote: >Hi Steve, > >Steve McIntyre wrote: > >> I'll remove the -Werror to stop gcc breaking the build here, but I >> definitely believe that gcc is doing the wrong thing here. >> Technically, yes - the variables are set but unused. However, this is >> a far higher level of pedantry than is warranted for -Wall. > >The -Wall option has implied -Wunused-variable for a very long time; >the idea as I understand it was to detect dead code which might be an >indicator for other problems (typos or planned functionality that was >left out) and which is distracting. As I understand it, the only >reason -Wunused-but-set-variable did not exist until recently was a >small accident of implementation, that technically "x = 5;" is an >expression that evaluates "x". > >I believe the best way to avoid breaking the build is to simply not use >-Werror on autobuilders.
The -Werror flag itself isn't the real problem for me, and I've already removed it in my upload. I'm much more worried about (IMHO) broken decisions being made in gcc about the levels of some warnings. See my second mail in a few minutes... >I would like to teach autobuilders to send warnings by email to >interested maintainers so maintainers could get the benefit of >notification without making the release team and toolchain >maintainers' lives more difficult; would you be interested in that? Potentially, yes. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. st...@einval.com Welcome my son, welcome to the machine. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-gcc-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110603145534.gd28...@einval.com
