On Tue, 2005-08-30 at 18:50 +0200, Mathias Bauer wrote: > Ken Foskey wrote: > > On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 17:59 +0200, Stephan Bergmann wrote: > > > >> If someone think it's reasonable to suppress a warning, this must be > >> discussed with the team members. It should also be discussed in public, > >> using the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please start the subject with > >> “compiler warnings:”. > > > > * Initially I would suggest -Wno-reorder (I think) > > > > There are a HUGE number of errors caused simply by the order of the > > variables in the class declaration and I have only found one instance > > where it indicated a real error (parent initialisation depended on child > > data). The needle for this one is small and the haystack particularly > > large. Because of the pervasiveness of this change merges afterwards a > > PAINFUL! I speak from experience. I would think about doing this > > module by module as a separate exercise. > > Just to make sure that I understood correctly: you suggest to ignore > these warnings but work on it in a subsequent CWS? > > This is a real useful warning that can find some really nasty errors, so > we should definitely work on keeping it activated, but of course if > there are so much places that trigger the warning it could be a good > idea to postpone it to a later CWS.
Yes, In my experience this warning leads to a lot of changes. Doing this initialy will make the whole process really tedious, (as opposed to simply tedious). It will also break a lot of merges of patches. -- Ken Foskey OpenOffice.org developer --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
