On Jul 10, 2013, at 10:42 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Andrew Haley <a...@redhat.com> writes:
>
>> On 07/09/2013 12:59 PM, Andreas Arnez wrote:
>>> With this situation at hand, I wonder whether it's a good idea to keep
>>> maybe-uninitialized included in -Wall. Projects which have been using
>>> "-Wall -Werror" successfully for many years are now forced to
>>> investigate non-existing bugs in their code.
>>
>> But maybe-uninitialized is very useful, and it's not really inappropriate
>> for -Wall. I would question the appropriateness of using -Wall -Werror
>> in production code.
>
> Unfortunately a number of projects do that. I regularly have to remove
> -Werror from shipped makefiles, and it's primarily due to this warning.
>
> Maybe not erroring on the maybe by default would be a good idea?
I would rather see such warnings fixed. They exist for a good reason. (If
there are false warnings, those are compiler bugs to fix. But in most cases I
have seen, the warnings are legit.)
Changing -Werror to mean "error out on *most* warnings" would be a very serious
mistake.
paul
