Kristian Fiskerstrand schrieb:
On 9/10/18 11:19 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
It is indeed an insurmountable task to write code that is warning-free
from the beginning across architectures, compiler versions, etc. But
that is not the goal anyway. It is examining the situation and taking
appropriate action, and then applying a change to no longer cause that
particular warning (or make it non-fatal if the warning is bogus/harmless).
sure, but for upstreams that make this an explicit goal, do we really
want to apply additional downstream pataches with the additional
complexity that carries for build system (autotools re-generation that
might make it unsupported upstream etc) ?
I fully understand why in the general case this is considered undesirable.
But in very specific cases it can make sense to err on the side of caution,
and the rigid -Werror policy gets in the way. This is what the initial
message by bircoph suggested.
Best regards,
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
