Hi Michael, On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Michael Behrisch <o...@behrisch.de> wrote:
> Hi Ronald, > > Am 17.10.2016 um 21:37 schrieb Ronald S. Bultje: > > Hi Michael, > > > > On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 3:16 PM, Michael Behrisch <o...@behrisch.de> > > wrote: > > > >> Am 17.10.2016 um 15:29 schrieb Michael Niedermayer: > >>> On Mon, Oct 17, 2016 at 01:34:55PM +0200, wm4 wrote: > >>>> On Mon, 17 Oct 2016 13:09:36 +0200 Michael Niedermayer > >>>> <mich...@niedermayer.cc> wrote: > >>>> > >>> this is about a cosmetic change having no real technical effect > >> > >> So here are my cosmetics for libavutil. It simply helps with > >> keeping track of real warnings in downstream projects. > > > > > > Why are you using -Wpedantic? > > My main reason is that we are compiling with different compilers for > different platforms and -Wpedantic at least promises to keep the code > closer to the standard and thus better transferable. I never tested > whether this is actually true, but I like the fact that the project > currently compiles with gcc, clang and msvc and welcome every tool and > option that helps me to keep it this way. See also here: > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/2855121/what-is-the- > purpose-of-using-pedantic-in-gcc-g-compiler > > > > > Most people use warnings as a way for the compiler to inform them of > > potential bugs in their code; has -Wpedantic ever helped you find > > bugs? > > I cannot think of any but to be honest I cannot even tell exactly which > warnings are enabled by which of the -Wall, -Wextra and -Wpedantic flags > and it is surprisingly hard to find out. FFmpeg compiles with msvc, clang and gcc (without -Wpedantic), so the logic seems a little strange. Ronald _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org http://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel