On Thu, 28 Jan 1999, Nate Williams wrote:
> > > Some people when confronted by people wanting to have extra braces
> > > say "change style(9)".
> > >
> > > Well, here is my change..
> >
> > You can count my vote.
> >
> > I would also add a paragraph like this:
> >
> > If possible code should complile cleanly with gcc's -Wall flag.
> > Note however that this does not imply that it's OK to eliminate
> > warnings simply by covering them up with typecasts, etc., as that
> > actually does more harm than good.
> >
> > I hope that wording is sufficiently unoffensive to the -Wall haters.
>
> '-Wall haters'. That almost sounds like 'Wall-flowers' or something. :)
>
> Agreed, but that's not the only reason I dislike '-Wall'. The other
> reason is that some of the warnings enabled in -Wall are purely
> stylistic, and are not even warnings.
>
> Making all software compile quietly with gcc -Wall means complying with
> what the GNU folks thinks is the correct 'style' of writing software,
> rather than having style issues ignored. In other words, you end up
> making change change for the sake of change, which is silly just to
> please the compiler.
>
> But, after the recent flame fiasco I'm not saying anything more.
>
I for one like the warning
do {foo();} while(bar=baz());
that shows up, saying parentheses should be used. YES, this is a style thing,
BUT if you use the extra parentheses and know what it means, you know that
the author meant
do {foo();} while((bar=baz())!=0);
instead of
do {foo();} while(bar==baz());
This is just one of the cases in which I agree with the "style" comments/
warnings in GCC -Wall.
>
> Nate
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [email protected]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
>
Brian Feldman _ __ ___ ___ ___
[email protected] _ __ ___ | _ ) __| \
http://www.freebsd.org/ _ __ ___ ____ | _ \__ \ |) |
FreeBSD: The Power to Serve! _ __ ___ ____ _____ |___/___/___/
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [email protected]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
