Hello On 20/12/16 17:36, Mike Blumenkrantz wrote: > I think your "How many real issues have you seen" was the same argument > against running any static analysis a couple years ago; now we have weekly > reports for that. > > I have seen bugs that resulted from illegal float comparison. The fact that > a warning may be a false positive in some or even most cases does not > ensure that every warning is a false positive. > > Given that we are so pedantic about warnings for much more trivial matters > (e.g., -Wunused-parameter as part of -Wextra), it seems bizarre to me that > anyone would complain about enforcing valid comparisons for floats.
Getting the code in shape for correct float comparisons is actually something I would like to see. The real problem here is/was how this was handled. Forcing the compiler flag to everyone's build is the problem. That and seeing Chris and Cedric going crazy and doing nearly 100 patches in a short timeframe. And even after all this my build was still noisy with all these warnings. The reason we are so pedantic with the other warnings from the default flags is that we want to have a clean build output to _actually spot warnings from new code_ we are working on. I reverted the patch putting it into the default compiler flags. Enable it locally, get the the amount of warnings down to a sane amount and I'm all for putting it in again. (tests and examples are also full of it. Mentioning it here because I know how much people love to avoid compiling those.) regards Stefan Schmidt ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Developer Access Program for Intel Xeon Phi Processors Access to Intel Xeon Phi processor-based developer platforms. With one year of Intel Parallel Studio XE. Training and support from Colfax. Order your platform today.http://sdm.link/intel _______________________________________________ enlightenment-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/enlightenment-devel
