On 12/6/2011 9:16 AM, David Brown wrote:
I would say it's better to have false positives in cases like this, than false negatives, because there are easy ways to remove the false positives.
My view is that for compiler warnings, you want to balance false positives and false negatives. If you give too many false positives people just turn off the warning anyway. I think the current balance is probably about right. If you want more thorough warnings, with no false negatives, then separate static analysis tools are more appropriate. They can do a better job than the compiler in any case.
