Hi all,
> Ken Foskey wrote:
So I would actually recommend against an all out warnings push unless
everyone is VERY clear the objective is to highlight bugs not to remove
warnings. The difference in objectives is very important.
Yes, but given the mass of code we have, the only way I see to really
"highlight bugs", is to remove as much as all warnings.
2 To reach that main objective, we have to remove warnings from the
current code base. There are to cases:
2a The warning indicates an error in the code. We will fix that error
(which is a positive side effect of the efforts spent on this CWS;
> [...])
2b The warning is a spurious one. However, to reach the main
objective, we have to make it go away anyway, by modifying the code base
in some way or other. This (as well as deciding whether the occurence
of a warning is case 2a or 2b) is a delicate task, to be sure.
I agree with Stephan, that - though this task may be delicate in a few
cases (most cases I had a look at are quite simple) - it is necessary.
And as the software professionals and/or enthusiasts we are, I don't
really think it is impossible. This is just our work.
Nikolai
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
